News of the fatal beating of a police officer by a mob outside a nightclub in Taipei’s Xinyi District (信義) on Sunday has sent shockwaves across the nation.
Three suspects have since been detained and charged with homicide, but many questions remain unanswered.
The incident is a grave matter. Taiwan prides itself on being a nation of law and order, so when a police officer — a representative of the law responsible for maintaining public order — is assaulted and killed in public view, something is not quite right, and authorities should not take the matter lightly.
Strictly speaking, the victim, Hsueh Chen-kuo (薛貞國), 38, was not at the scene in his capacity as a police officer, as he was off duty that day. He was not in uniform, nor was he equipped with the accoutrements that officers carry when he was asked to help handle a dispute at the Spark ATT bar. Police reports said that about 50 suspects attacked Hsueh with baseball bats and clubs, dragged him outside into the street and left him to die from injuries to his head and body.
Although Hsueh was off duty, according to the Xinyi District Police Precinct, he felt duty-bound to investigate what was happening when he learned of the disturbance in the area he usually patrolled. Regardless of whether the suspects knew he was a police officer, the fact that they could beat a stranger to death without fear of the law is a serious sign of deteriorating public safety.
Some have asked why Hsueh did not call the police station for backup before stepping into the club single-handedly to try to handle the disturbance. Police reports later revealed that another officer, surnamed Chuang (莊), was with Hsueh at the time of the incident. However, many have also found it puzzling why Chuang, who was on a leave of absence due to a heart problem, did not alert police in uniform to handle the case officially.
There are also rumors of dubious relations between Hsueh and gangsters, prompting some to lament how negative an impression the public has of police that even when an officer was the victim in a tragedy, his integrity is being questioned.
The incident has seemingly turned into a national guessing game, with members of the public questioning the case and the role of Hsueh and Chuang in the incident, as rumors and speculation on the complex relations between police and gangsters mount.
The incident also exposed a lack of awareness and training on the part of the Xinyi District Police Precinct, whose jurisdiction houses many “special business establishments,” such as nightclubs, KTVs and bars that, more so than other businesses, tend to be associated with criminal activity. With that in mind, one would think it is standard procedure for the precinct to increase its patrol and monitoring of the area, so that it is not left to other police officers calling the center to inform it of what is happening on its own “turf.”
One way to put to rest the mounting suspicions surrounding the role of the police in the case is for the authorities to take timely and transparent action to get to the bottom of the matter regardless of the consequences and who may be involved.
Only by exercising determination and getting to the bottom of the incident with transparency and impartiality can the authorities revive the public’s confidence in law enforcement officers, as well as erase its negative impression about police officers in general.
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
On a quiet lane in Taipei’s central Daan District (大安), an otherwise unremarkable high-rise is marked by a police guard and a tawdry A4 printout from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs indicating an “embassy area.” Keen observers would see the emblem of the Holy See, one of Taiwan’s 12 so-called “diplomatic allies.” Unlike Taipei’s other embassies and quasi-consulates, no national flag flies there, nor is there a plaque indicating what country’s embassy this is. Visitors hoping to sign a condolence book for the late Pope Francis would instead have to visit the Italian Trade Office, adjacent to Taipei 101. The death of
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
As the highest elected official in the nation’s capital, Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an (蔣萬安) is the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) candidate-in-waiting for a presidential bid. With the exception of Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕), Chiang is the most likely KMT figure to take over the mantle of the party leadership. All the other usual suspects, from Legislative Speaker Han Kuo-yu (韓國瑜) to New Taipei City Mayor Hou You-yi (侯友宜) to KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) have already been rejected at the ballot box. Given such high expectations, Chiang should be demonstrating resolve, calm-headedness and political wisdom in how he faces tough
RSS