Last Thursday, National Taiwan University (NTU) Hospital voted down a request from Chao Chien-ming (趙建銘) -- the son-in-law of President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) -- to return to his job as an orthopedic doctor at the hospital. The hospital's decision will help preserve its reputation, given that it is already facing criticism as a result of Chao's implication in insider trading charges. However, whether the hospital can really keep Chao from returning to his job is another matter.
Three rounds of voting -- by the ethics committee, orthopedic department and the hospital management -- at the hospital were all against the return of Chao. During the last round of voting, by the hospital management, 57 people voted against Chao's return, one in favor, and one abstained. Why anyone would want to return to work in an environment showing such animosity is a question only Chao can answer.
In July, the hospital suspended Chao from his job based on Article 3 of the Civil Servants' Disciplinary Act, according to which any civil servant who is in custody or has an arrest warrant filed against him or her should be suspended from his or her job. Chao is considered a civil servant because he works for NTU Hospital ? a teaching hospital owned by National Taiwan University. NTU is of course a public university supervised by the Ministry of Education.
At the time of his original suspension, Chao was in jail, because the prosecutor's office detained him in order to avoid any risk of collusion between him and others implicated in the insider trading scandal. His suspension was valid on legal grounds.
According to Article 10 of the act, a civil servant who has been suspended from his or her job may request permission to return to that job within three months, after the reason for the original suspension ended. Chao is no longer in jail, and therefore he would like to go back to work. To protect the interests of civil servants, Article 10 also stipulates that unless there are legal grounds for refusing the request, the requester should be allowed to return to work.
The reason cited by NTU Hospital for refusing Chao's request was that he had seriously violated medical ethics and therefore was no longer fit to be a doctor at the hospital. This is where the hospital's decision could be challenged.
Chao's role in the insider trading scandal is distasteful. He was the straw that broke the camel's back in terms of public tolerance for scandals in which members of the first family were allegedly involved. The sense of resentment toward him is uniform across the pan-green and pan-blue camps.
This is why the hospital is placed on the spot. It would be wrong to welcome Chao with open arms -- not to mention an invitation for "red guards" to stage a siege at the hospital. However, Chao's case is still under criminal investigation, despite the fact that just about everyone believes he is guilty. His guilt will still need to be confirmed by a court of law.
The hot potato has now been passed to the Civil Servants Disciplinary Committee of the Judiciary Yuan, which holds the final authority regarding the fate of Chao. If the committee cannot find legal grounds to accept the decision of the hospital and Chao returns to work, this may be the excuse that the anti-Chen camp has been waiting for.
US President Donald Trump created some consternation in Taiwan last week when he told a news conference that a successful trade deal with China would help with “unification.” Although the People’s Republic of China has never ruled Taiwan, Trump’s language struck a raw nerve in Taiwan given his open siding with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aggression seeking to “reunify” Ukraine and Russia. On earlier occasions, Trump has criticized Taiwan for “stealing” the US’ chip industry and for relying too much on the US for defense, ominously presaging a weakening of US support for Taiwan. However, further examination of Trump’s remarks in
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
It is being said every second day: The ongoing recall campaign in Taiwan — where citizens are trying to collect enough signatures to trigger re-elections for a number of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — is orchestrated by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), or even President William Lai (賴清德) himself. The KMT makes the claim, and foreign media and analysts repeat it. However, they never show any proof — because there is not any. It is alarming how easily academics, journalists and experts toss around claims that amount to accusing a democratic government of conspiracy — without a shred of evidence. These
China on May 23, 1951, imposed the so-called “17-Point Agreement” to formally annex Tibet. In March, China in its 18th White Paper misleadingly said it laid “firm foundations for the region’s human rights cause.” The agreement is invalid in international law, because it was signed under threat. Ngapo Ngawang Jigme, head of the Tibetan delegation sent to China for peace negotiations, was not authorized to sign the agreement on behalf of the Tibetan government and the delegation was made to sign it under duress. After seven decades, Tibet remains intact and there is global outpouring of sympathy for Tibetans. This realization
RSS