When the new legislative session starts at the end of the month, Premier William Lai (賴清德), who took office on Friday last week, will have to face legislators in general question-and-answer sessions.
A lot of people are wondering how he will handle questions about labor issues and pension reform for military personnel.
Apart from these issues, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislative caucus will prioritize legislation related to judicial reform, and it intends to enact some of the organizational restructuring and other proposals made by the National Congress on Judicial Reform, which held its summary meeting on Aug. 12.
This will fulfill one of the campaign pledges made by President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) before she was elected, namely to make the judiciary into one that the public can trust.
This is an appropriate time to remind the legislature that it must rid the justice system of the toxins left over from the authoritarian era. Only then can the judiciary gain the trust of the public.
The regimes of former presidents Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) and Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國) froze all kinds of rules that provided people with safeguards, turning the judiciary into a band of henchmen who helped the dictatorship get rid of its political opponents.
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) happily used all kinds of rewards to absorb the entire judiciary into its web of complicity.
For example, for a long time the KMT collaborated with entities such as the Four Seas Gang and the Bamboo Union, and established a symbiotic relationship between prosecutors and organized crime.
Until quite recently, it was still quite common to hear reports about law enforcement officials shielding vice and gambling rackets, as well as obstructing investigations and evidence gathering.
In one of her speeches, Tsai asked rhetorically whether everyone who lived under authoritarian rule chose to be obedient.
During the authoritarian period, principles that apply in countries under the rule of law were shelved. From the point of view of human nature, one would not expect law enforcement officials of those days to stand up and resist tyranny.
Nowadays we enjoy freedom and the rule of law, but it still seems unlikely that judicial personnel who are used to obeying could, within a short time, break free of the bad habits formed over many long years and learn how to investigate and judge cases independently.
The way in which a judge was summarily replaced in the case against former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) and the opaque manner in which prosecutors and the Special Investigation Division conducted the investigation involving then-legislative speaker Wang Jin-pyng (王金平) and DPP Legislator Ker Chien-ming (柯建銘) are solid proof that some judicial personnel still do not act independently.
This is even more true of police officers, who serve on the judicial system’s front line.
When a student at a police training institute posted comments online criticizing people protesting pension reform, several former students of the institute threatened to make sure that the poster would not last in the police force.
The institute did nothing about the threats.
The police’s treatment of protests by retired former students compared with how they dealt with ordinary members of the public makes it hard for people to believe that such an organization can resist interference by its superiors or other powerful people.
Furthermore, it is well known that forbears’ traditions have greater weight than teaching about the rule of law at the Central Police University and the Taiwan Police College.
How can police who have been trained like this gain trust?
Of course, it is undeniable that judicial personnel have in recent years made considerable progress in terms of independence and professionalism. Nonetheless, the most pressing issue for judicial reform is how to excise the culture of obedience, which is a holdover from the authoritarian era that is still pervasive among judicial personnel, as well as the complicity that allows all kinds of outside interference.
Only by making a clean break with authoritarianism can the judiciary overcome the memories that have been deeply implanted in people’s minds over the decades.
There are three fundamental suggestions for lawmakers who claim to give high priority to judicial reform:
First, improve and oversee the independence of judicial personnel.
Second, eliminate the pervasive culture of obedience among judicial personnel.
Third, deconstruct the webs of complicity left over from the authoritarian era.
If the toxic legacy of authoritarianism in the judiciary keeps being overlooked, judicial reform will never succeed.
Lau Yi-te is chairman of the Taiwan Solidarity Union.
Translated by Julian Clegg
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry