Former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) yesterday told the High Court that he did not break the law when dealing with wiretaps of two top lawmakers in 2013 by the now-defunct Special Investigation Division (SID) of the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office.
However, prosecutors said that Ma should be convicted, as judges at the Taipei District Court had cited incorrect legal interpretations in a 2017 decision that found Ma not guilty of libel and leaking confidential information in a lawsuit filed by Democratic Progressive Party caucus whip Ker Chien-ming (柯建銘).
The High Court in May last year found Ma guilty of contravening provisions of the Communication Security and Surveillance Act (通訊保障及監察法), the Personal Information Protection Act (個人資料保護法) and the Criminal Code, overturning the District Court’s verdict.
Photo: Liu Hsin-de, Taipei Times
He was sentenced to four months in jail, which could be commuted to a fine of NT$120,000, but the Supreme Court ordered a retrial, saying it found flaws in the High Court’s ruling, which made an ambiguous interpretation of the law regarding the official responsibility and executive powers wielded by Ma, who was president at the time, and the other politicians involved in the case.
In August and September of 2013, the SID headed by then-prosecutor-general Huang Shyh-ming (黃世銘) was conducting an investigation into alleged improper lobbying by Ker in a breach of trust case.
Wiretaps were placed on Ker, then-legislative speaker Wang Jin-pyng (王金平) of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and other legislative officials.
Prosecutors said Huang provided wiretapped transcripts to Ma, who discussed the information with then-premier Jiang Yi-huah (江宜樺) and then-Presidential Office deputy secretary-general Lo Chih-chiang (羅智強).
At the hearing yesterday, Ma said the SID probe targeting Ker was a major case that could have affected the stability of society and the political establishment, which justified his discussions with Jiang and Lo to prevent a potential political crisis.
“What I did was absolutely in line with the law and in accordance to the Constitution,” Ma said. “I stress again that I did not break the law.”
High Court Prosecutor Chou Shih-yu (周士榆) said that Huang met Ma on Aug. 31, 2013, to report on the probe’s progress and hand over wiretap transcripts.
“At that time, the investigation was ongoing. Ma leaked confidential information to Jiang and Lo in a clear breach of the law, as Ma instructed Huang to divulge classified information of an active case,” Chou said.
Ma’s application of “special presidential executive powers” as outlined in the Constitution — which allow the president to consult and mediate disputes between branches of government — did not apply, Chou said, adding that his defense at the Taipei District Court trial was invalid.
Judges cited erroneous interpretations of the law to acquit Ma in the first ruling, so the High Court’s conviction of Ma last year should stand, Chou said.
Ker told reporters before yesterday’s court proceedings that “the case concerns safeguarding the Constitution and the rule of law, to curb the abuse of power by government leaders.”
“The court should make it clear that a president cannot interfere in the judiciary and cannot undermine the Constitution and create political turmoil,” Ker said.
Former Czech Republic-based Taiwanese researcher Cheng Yu-chin (鄭宇欽) has been sentenced to seven years in prison on espionage-related charges, China’s Ministry of State Security announced yesterday. China said Cheng was a spy for Taiwan who “masqueraded as a professor” and that he was previously an assistant to former Cabinet secretary-general Cho Jung-tai (卓榮泰). President-elect William Lai (賴清德) on Wednesday last week announced Cho would be his premier when Lai is inaugurated next month. Today is China’s “National Security Education Day.” The Chinese ministry yesterday released a video online showing arrests over the past 10 years of people alleged to be
THE HAWAII FACTOR: While a 1965 opinion said an attack on Hawaii would not trigger Article 5, the text of the treaty suggests the state is covered, the report says NATO could be drawn into a conflict in the Taiwan Strait if Chinese forces attacked the US mainland or Hawaii, a NATO Defense College report published on Monday says. The report, written by James Lee, an assistant research fellow at Academia Sinica’s Institute of European and American Studies, states that under certain conditions a Taiwan contingency could trigger Article 5 of NATO, under which an attack against any member of the alliance is considered an attack against all members, necessitating a response. Article 6 of the North Atlantic Treaty specifies that an armed attack in the territory of any member in Europe,
LIKE FAMILY: People now treat dogs and cats as family members. They receive the same medical treatments and tests as humans do, a veterinary association official said The number of pet dogs and cats in Taiwan has officially outnumbered the number of human newborns last year, data from the Ministry of Agriculture’s pet registration information system showed. As of last year, Taiwan had 94,544 registered pet dogs and 137,652 pet cats, the data showed. By contrast, 135,571 babies were born last year. Demand for medical care for pet animals has also risen. As of Feb. 29, there were 5,773 veterinarians in Taiwan, 3,993 of whom were for pet animals, statistics from the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Agency showed. In 2022, the nation had 3,077 pediatricians. As of last
XINJIANG: Officials are conducting a report into amending an existing law or to enact a special law to prohibit goods using forced labor Taiwan is mulling an amendment prohibiting the importation of goods using forced labor, similar to the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act (UFLPA) passed by the US Congress in 2021 that imposed limits on goods produced using forced labor in China’s Xinjiang region. A government official who wished to remain anonymous said yesterday that as the US customs law explicitly prohibits the importation of goods made using forced labor, in 2021 it passed the specialized UFLPA to limit the importation of cotton and other goods from China’s Xinjiang Uyghur region. Taiwan does not have the legal basis to prohibit the importation of goods