Corruption scandals are always about money. All you need to do is follow the money, and it will invariably lead you to the culprit.
In the mother of all political scandals, the Watergate scandal, it was the sequential serial numbers on banknotes found in the possession of the burglars that were subsequently traced to the campaign headquarters of then-US president Richard Nixon’s Committee to Re-Elect the President that implicated the resident of the White House.
Following the money led the investigation to the people responsible. From that point on, it was a question of how far up the buck was to be passed.
Then-US senator Howard Baker, who was serving on the US Senate committee investigating the scandal, famously asked: “What did the president know and when did he know it?”
Following that, the White House recordings, which came to be known as the “smoking gun tapes,” proved conclusively that Nixon not only had knowledge of what was happening, but that he had also abused his powers in an attempt to conceal the truth, and was therefore guilty of obstructing the law.
Earlier this year, the New York branch of Mega International Commercial Bank was accused of violating US money laundering regulations and was ordered to pay a huge fine by US regulators.
In addition to evidence of illegal transactions, then-bank chairman Mckinney Tsai (蔡友才) failed to heed an order from US regulators and take corrective measures. After the US authorities stepped up their investigation, the parties involved in the transactions that violated banking rules had nowhere left to hide.
When the Watergate scandal first broke, the White House tried to pass it off as a “third-rate burglary.”
Mega Bank also tried to pass off the serious problem as “administrative oversight,” and ignored warnings by US regulators.
It is quite easy to understand why the White House wanted to cover up the Watergate scandal; it is less obvious why Mega Bank would want to cover for its clients.
The only possible explanation is that the clients involved were not ordinary bank customers: They must wield considerable influence over the bank. Otherwise, the bank would not have exposed itself to the risk and allowed itself to be involved in illegal activity unlikely to have gone unnoticed by US authorities.
There have been rumors of irregular arrangements for personnel and funds by the administration of former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) between 2013 and 2014.
A reasonable explanation might be found there.
Evidence for this case exists, and with the change of government early this year, and the new government’s emphasis on introducing judicial reform, the Mega Bank case has picked up steam, and there is a renewed opportunity to seek out the facts in the case and find those responsible.
The government’s strict supervisory measures mean there is no longer any place to hide.
It is not only Taiwanese who are watching the government’s progress on dealing with this case. The US officials who originally discovered Mega Bank’s shady dealings are taking a keen interest, too.
Someone out there has something to hide, but the evidence exists: it just needs to be checked.
The public would dearly like to see a difference between this government and the last lot; it owes us some answers.
James Wang is a media commentator.
Translated by Paul Cooper
As Taiwan’s domestic political crisis deepens, the opposition Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) have proposed gutting the country’s national spending, with steep cuts to the critical foreign and defense ministries. While the blue-white coalition alleges that it is merely responding to voters’ concerns about corruption and mismanagement, of which there certainly has been plenty under Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and KMT-led governments, the rationales for their proposed spending cuts lay bare the incoherent foreign policy of the KMT-led coalition. Introduced on the eve of US President Donald Trump’s inauguration, the KMT’s proposed budget is a terrible opening
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
“I compare the Communist Party to my mother,” sings a student at a boarding school in a Tibetan region of China’s Qinghai province. “If faith has a color,” others at a different school sing, “it would surely be Chinese red.” In a major story for the New York Times this month, Chris Buckley wrote about the forced placement of hundreds of thousands of Tibetan children in boarding schools, where many suffer physical and psychological abuse. Separating these children from their families, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) aims to substitute itself for their parents and for their religion. Buckley’s reporting is
Last week, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), together holding more than half of the legislative seats, cut about NT$94 billion (US$2.85 billion) from the yearly budget. The cuts include 60 percent of the government’s advertising budget, 10 percent of administrative expenses, 3 percent of the military budget, and 60 percent of the international travel, overseas education and training allowances. In addition, the two parties have proposed freezing the budgets of many ministries and departments, including NT$1.8 billion from the Ministry of National Defense’s Indigenous Defense Submarine program — 90 percent of the program’s proposed
RSS