The sanctity of life is not a laughing matter, including the life of a prisoner, whose imprisonment should not be considered a deprivation of his or her basic rights. In the case of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), his medical rights are in jeopardy. Regrettably, however, reports of Chen’s deteriorating health suggest President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and his government have not been taking the life of the nation’s former head of state seriously.
Chen, serving a 17-and-a-half-year prison term on corruption charges, was sent to Taoyuan General Hospital on Tuesday last week for a check-up and returned to Taipei Prison that same afternoon, before being rushed to the hospital the following night after complaining of pain when urinating. After Chen underwent an extended examination, a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) test found a 4mm by 4mm trace of a cerebral vascular accident in his right frontal lobe.
At the invitation of Chen’s family, a further study of the MRI images by a group of physicians, including Taipei Veterans General Hospital physician Kuo Cheng-deng (郭正典), Taipei General Hospital vice president Kuo Chang-feng (郭長豐) and Mackay Memorial Hospital psychiatrist Chen Chiao-chicy (陳喬琪), suggested Chen Shui-bian has not only one, but several traces of cerebral vascular accidents in his right frontal lobe.
Kaohsiung Mayor Chen Chu (陳菊), who suffered a minor stroke in 2007 herself, said after visiting Chen Shui-bian on Tuesday that she was most disturbed by his obvious speech difficulties. Noting that stuttering can be caused by brain damage, National Taiwan University Hospital physician Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) yesterday suggested that Chen might develop dementia if he fails to receive proper medical attention.
All the reports pointing to the former president’s deteriorating physical and mental state beg the question: How credible has the Taipei Prison been in its statements time and time again dismissing the public’s concern for his health? It is little wonder there is growing public speculation questioning whether the Ma administration is placing political considerations above Chen Shui-bian’s human rights.
Ma has taken pride in his efforts to protect human rights, giving himself a pat on the back several times, trumpeting how it was under his watch that the nation signed the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in 2009.
Ma should revisit the two covenants and practice what he preaches. In particular, he should look up the first clause in the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights’ Part III, Article 6, which states: “Every human being has the inherent right to life. This right shall be protected by law. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his life.” He should also look at the first clause in Article 10, which states: “All persons deprived of their liberty shall be treated with humanity and with respect for the inherent dignity of the human person.”
Ma may also want to remember that Article 58 of the Prison Act (監獄行刑法) stipulates that a prison administration may apply to have a prisoner given medical parole or sent to an outside hospital for treatment if the prison cannot provide adequate treatment.
A fair number of people have been quick to dismiss the Chen family’s pleas for medical parole, taunting the family and physicians for exaggerating Chen Shui-bian’s ailments and ridiculing him for “faking it.”
It is indeed regrettable when the professionalism of physicians is brought into disrepute. However, if Ma is suspicious of the calls by Ko and the others, branding them “pan-green physicians,” why doesn’t he assemble a medial team of his own choosing — one preferably headed by Department of Health Minister Chiu Wen-ta (邱文達), a renowned neurosurgeon — to determine Chen Shui-bian’s physical and mental condition?
If Ma and his government continue to be blinded by political considerations and take Chen Shui-bian’s health lightly, it is not hyperbole to suggest that they could one day find themselves labeled as his “murderers.”
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