After months of speculation, the prosecutors working on the Sogo Department Store voucher case have finished their investigation and issued indictments. They are asking for sentences of three-and-a-half years for former Waterland Financial Holding chief Walter Lin (林華德), two-and-a-half years for Far Eastern Group chairman Douglas Hsu (徐旭東) and two years each for Far Eastern Group's legal and financial consultants Huang Mao-te (黃茂德) and Champion Lee (李冠軍).
Pacific Distribution Investment chairman Lee Heng-lung (
Because the investigation found no evidence implicating figures connected to the Presidential Office -- including first lady Wu Shu-jen (吳淑珍), former first-family doctor Huang Fang-yen (黃芳彥) and former Presidential Office deputy secretaries-general Ma Yung-cheng (馬永成) and Chen Che-nan (陳哲男) -- their files have been closed.
Of course, one must carefully read the indictment to understand how and why the prosecution determined the validity of each charge. Since only well-connected businessmen were indicted, it appears that in the eyes of prosecutors this was a game of businessmen trying to outwit each other for corporate gain, whereas Wu was a minor player who unwittingly had her name thrown around by the others to gain leverage in their maneuvering.
The picture as sketched by prosecutors is obviously inconsistent with criticisms from the pan-blue camp and vivid accusations from the public that the first family intervened in the operations of Sogo.
If the prosecutors' methods of examination are logical and adhere to the law, then the authority of the prosecutorial office demands that the decision be respected.
The first paragraph of Article 31 of the Criminal Code reads: "In the case of crimes committed through use of official position or other [special] relationships, those aiding and abetting will still be considered accomplices, even though they do not have any special relationship themselves. However, their sentence should be lightened."
Although Wu is not a public official, if she was an accomplice of a public official from the banking sector, for example, who was bribed to help Sogo, according to this regulation she could still be prosecuted for taking a bribe.
However, in this case there was no state-run bank involved, nor a breach of trust by a public official. Therefore, even if the prosecution determined that Wu had "indirectly" accepted Sogo vouchers, it would still be difficult to establish that she had taken a bribe.
In addition, prosecutors have determined that the value of vouchers "indirectly" accepted by Wu amounted to only NT$270,000 (US$8,100), which is completely out of proportion to the potential profit that can be generated by gaining ownership of Sogo. Therefore, it would be difficult for prosecutors to determine a connection between the issues. If the value of the vouchers accepted by Wu is accurate, then even though I don't support the prosecutor's reasoning, the decision at least isn't absurd.
In the Taiwan Development case, the prosecutor ruled that the NT$30 million involved had been a regular loan that had nothing to do with Chao Chien-ming's (趙建銘) undue interference. In comparing the reasoning for the two cases, I find the Sogo case to be more convincing.
Based on the indictment, I believe that Huang's role in the Sogo ownership battle is very suspicious, as he tried to escape to the US immediately after the case came to light.
Lee also awarded Huang Sogo vouchers worth roughly NT$2 million. I wonder what Huang did to make Lee give him such a grandiose gift.
I believe that prosecutors should now look into whether Huang sought to broker an illegal deal using his personal connections with the first family instead of making a scapegoat of certain businessmen allegedly involved in the case.
As there is still a huge amount of vouchers that have not been identified, if the prosecutor in charge of the case cannot give the public a detailed account of how these controversial vouchers were used, then the opposition parties will continue to make a fuss.
The public is expecting the prosecutors to rebuild the "core values of a civic society." Although such an appeal is legitimate, the law simply marks the minimum moral standard.
Some of those allegedly involved in this affair have violated moral standards, not legal ones. The law only governs legal obligations; other obligations are the preserve of civil society.
Chang Shen-hsin is a judge at the Taichung District Court.
Translated by Jason Cox and Daniel Cheng
On May 7, 1971, Henry Kissinger planned his first, ultra-secret mission to China and pondered whether it would be better to meet his Chinese interlocutors “in Pakistan where the Pakistanis would tape the meeting — or in China where the Chinese would do the taping.” After a flicker of thought, he decided to have the Chinese do all the tape recording, translating and transcribing. Fortuitously, historians have several thousand pages of verbatim texts of Dr. Kissinger’s negotiations with his Chinese counterparts. Paradoxically, behind the scenes, Chinese stenographers prepared verbatim English language typescripts faster than they could translate and type them
More than 30 years ago when I immigrated to the US, applied for citizenship and took the 100-question civics test, the one part of the naturalization process that left the deepest impression on me was one question on the N-400 form, which asked: “Have you ever been a member of, involved in or in any way associated with any communist or totalitarian party anywhere in the world?” Answering “yes” could lead to the rejection of your application. Some people might try their luck and lie, but if exposed, the consequences could be much worse — a person could be fined,
Xiaomi Corp founder Lei Jun (雷軍) on May 22 made a high-profile announcement, giving online viewers a sneak peek at the company’s first 3-nanometer mobile processor — the Xring O1 chip — and saying it is a breakthrough in China’s chip design history. Although Xiaomi might be capable of designing chips, it lacks the ability to manufacture them. No matter how beautifully planned the blueprints are, if they cannot be mass-produced, they are nothing more than drawings on paper. The truth is that China’s chipmaking efforts are still heavily reliant on the free world — particularly on Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing
On May 13, the Legislative Yuan passed an amendment to Article 6 of the Nuclear Reactor Facilities Regulation Act (核子反應器設施管制法) that would extend the life of nuclear reactors from 40 to 60 years, thereby providing a legal basis for the extension or reactivation of nuclear power plants. On May 20, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) legislators used their numerical advantage to pass the TPP caucus’ proposal for a public referendum that would determine whether the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant should resume operations, provided it is deemed safe by the authorities. The Central Election Commission (CEC) has
RSS