For the last dozen years, the Judicial Reform Foundation has held high hopes and expectations for the judiciary, and has been attentive in bringing up reform initiatives and providing necessary oversight. We aspire to maintain expertise and enthusiasm for the law and to strengthen the rule of law in Taiwan.
In recent years, investigations into irregularities by government officials have repeatedly caused suspicion and distrust among the public. This trend has made the foundation anxious. In particular, the view that the president's special allowance fund case should be investigated by outsiders and that it is a final decisive battle between two sides imply that judicial action in this case will decide Taiwan's entire future. Being an organization devoted to judicial reform and oversight, at this critical time we must make several declarations and express our expectations.
First, countries ruled by law respect the law and emphasize the system. They above all try and switch the expectation for saintly leaders into trust for the law and the system. Therefore, we would like to appeal to people not to have excessive expectations or hopes for the government or even the judiciary itself. By the same token, there is no need to attack and criticize the judiciary. Rather than hoping for a savior to descend from the heavens, the people should expend greater effort in planting the roots of legal education, nurturing the concept of the rule of law, and working to establish and abide by the law.
Second, criminal responsibility is much different from civil or administrative responsibility, and even more distinct from political responsibility. For criminal responsibility to be firmly established, accusations must pass through a strict process that involves providing evidence, presuming innocence, following the principle of reasonable doubt and establishing criminality based on legal statutes. Therefore politically inflammatory language and the inferences of media commentators, if unable to provide evidence that stands up to scrutiny, do not produce criminal responsibility.
Whether the parties involved take political or moral responsibility actually has nothing to do with the judiciary. Because of the special nature of legal decisions, a judgement will be unfavorable for one party, and unless one can prove using facts, evidence and legal principles that the judgement does not conform to reality, then one should accept the results of the judgment even if one is still not content with the result. This is the concrete manifestation of the spirit of the rule of law.
Finally, the people should leave the actual final legal judgement to the legal system, and judges or prosecutors alike must not make light of public expectations for the law. On major cases with historical significance, these officials should bravely take responsibility and show that they are following the letter of the law and thoroughly understand the issue by explaining complex facts to the world in simple language.
This is a crucial moment for the rule of law. Besides urging the officials involved to show their professionalism by adhering to the law, they should also understand the people's need for thorough and systematic justice. Nothing should be held back in a verdict, and they should be brave enough to show that they are not ashamed of having a sense of mission and justice when serving the nation's citizens.
We also urge the public to leave behind the destructive idea of benevolent and saintly rulers and break their superstitious trust in the government and the judiciary. Instead, all should turn their enthusiasm and energy toward deepening education in the rule of law and strengthening the system so that Taiwan can become a society that respects the rule of law.
The Judicial Reform Foundation was established in 1997.
Translated by Jason Cox
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS