In an admirable opinion piece in the Taipei Times, Aletheia University associate law professor Wu Ching-chin (吳景欽) addressed the ruling in the 2014 Kaohsiung gas explosion case by the court of second instance from the perspective of the ability of juristic persons to have criminal responsibility (“Culpability for 2014 gas explosions,” May 2, page 8).
Wu said that the criminal responsibility of juristic persons in work-safety related projects should be resolved by the Supreme Court.
As a retired engineering professional, I feel that the ruling is a bit off the mark.
Just as the warranty for every product will expire at some point in time, every project has an end-of-life date. Even buildings made of rebar and concrete will fall and disappear because of erosion by wind and rain, and the onslaught of earthquakes and land subsidence. Common sense tells us that underground pipelines will corrode and crack, be crushed by vehicles or destroyed by earthquakes.
After nuclear power plants, the public infrastructures that have the most stringent demand for quality are reservoirs. The nation’s 95 reservoirs are managed by 15 different units. Some managers who place great importance on reservoir safety will make safety inspections every five years according to the regulations and follow up with any necessary improvements. Others are focused on expenses and delay as much as they possibly can.
The responsibility of the top management can therefore be determined by whether their subordinates have reported maintenance needs. If their subordinates have neglected to report such needs, top management would only have administrative responsibilities, but if the needs have been reported, they would be criminally responsible.
In the Kaohsiung gas explosion case, front-line workers and managers were responsible for maintaining the pipelines. Looking at fluctuations in pipeline pressure should have told them that the pipelines were leaking.
There are detailed general maintenance manuals stipulating when operations should be halted due to low pressure and how often parts should be replaced. If the manuals were followed, there would be no criminal responsibility, and if something is missing in the manuals, the staff writing and approving the manuals would have administrative responsibility.
Pipelines at petrochemical plants must be replaced at regular intervals. This raises a question: The pipeline that exploded in Kaohsiung had been in operation for more than 20 years — did the companies ever consider replacing it?
Public servants were indeed at fault, especially the supervisors. Why did they not consider moving the pipeline when the box culverts were being built? Their continued carelessness planted the seeds for the disaster, but maintenance was the direct cause — were there any regulations regarding maintenance of the pipeline and how often it should be replaced?
It is the on-site response that sets off an explosion: That a pipeline is broken does not mean that it will necessarily explode — gas companies’ pipelines often have leaks without exploding.
The court of second instance’s ruling means that, from now on, any time there is an accident at a public facility, no one will look into what maintenance and repairs should have been carried out. The design, construction and supervision that took place dozens of years ago will be investigated.
Anyone who has been involved in a public construction project, whether still active or retired, will rest uneasy.
Chang Yen-ming is a former director of the Water Resources Agency.
Translated by Perry Svensson
The White House’s decision to take a 9.9 percent stake in Intel Corp is looking like very shrewd business indeed. Since the government bought in at US$20.47 a share last August, the US chipmaker’s surging stock price has delivered the US a US$43 billion return. One of the reasons the investment has so far proved so sound is that the White House has made sure of it. According to The Wall Street Journal, Howard personally pushed deals on Intel’s behalf with some of the most lucrative clients imaginable. They include Nvidia Corp, the company at the heart of the AI
A single photograph can cut through a lot of noise, but it can also be used to misrepresent the truth. At the very least, it can concentrate the mind on something that requires further investigation. On Monday last week, Ma Ying-jeou Foundation CEO Tai Hsia-ling (戴遐齡) and former National Security Council secretary-general King Pu-tsung (金溥聰) held a news conference in which they showed a photograph of former foundation CEO Hsiao Hsu-tsen (蕭旭岑), now Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) deputy chairman. In the image Hsiao is seated next to Xiamen Taiwan Businessmen Association chairman Han Ying-huan (韓螢煥). The two men were holding
I first met Professor Ray Jiing (井迎瑞) as a film and documentary student at Shih Hsin University’s (SHU) Department of Radio Television and Film in 1988. The following year, he went on to become the director of the Chinese Taipei Film Archive — forerunner of the Taiwan Film and Audiovisual Institute (TFAI). Over his eight-year tenure, Jiing rescued and restored over 200 classic Taiwanese films. In 1997, he established the Graduate Institute of Studies in Documentary and Film Archiving at Tainan National University of the Arts (TNNUA), and I joined the program in his third cohort of students. Beyond a
A recent report concerning a student who is suing his teacher posed the question in its headline: Does failing a student in two subjects constitute bullying? The college student in Chiayi County apparently sought NT$2 million (US$63,603) in state compensation, but a court dismissed the case. The first reaction of many might have been to ask: What has happened to students nowadays? Some say that teachers have lost their authority, while others say students are overindulged. Some even start reminiscing over the days when “whatever the teacher says goes.” However, the real issue might be overlooked if emotional reactions like that are the
RSS