A number of entertainers are suspected of evading military service by forging medical documents. As the cases involve alleged collusion with medical institutions, it touches not only on justice and integrity, but also on medical ethics and social trust.
Medical practice is regulated by the laws such as the Physicians Act (醫師法) and the Medical Care Act (醫療法), with integrity being a fundamental principle. If a doctor is involved in medical certificate forgery, they are intentionally contravening the core ethics of the medical profession.
The authority of doctors in public hospitals mostly comes from the trust that the public places in them. When people use them as a tool to shirk national obligations, it not only hurts the profession’s image as a whole, but also weakens the social trust in it. Doctors are often reluctant to issue certificates for Barthel Index-based health evaluations or medical expert testimonies, showing that they are unwilling to take on such judicial responsibility. If a conscript diagnosis certificate is inaccurate, we cannot rule out the possibility that medical workers have been defrauded by medical scalpers. However, there is always a paper trail, and prosecutors and investigators should be able to find out where the problem lies by investigating the suspects and the practice of military service evasion.
According to Article 5 of the Punishment Act for Violation to Military Service System (妨害兵役治罪條例), a person trying to evade general mobilization or temporary mobilization by fabricating a reason for an exemption, suspension, transfer or postponement of service, as well as for random mobilization or late mobilization, would be sentenced to no more than five years of imprisonment. The Criminal Code’s punishments for offenses of document forgery and related laws would also be applicable.
In other words, if a doctor intentionally issues a false diagnosis certificate, causing the military service unit to misclassify a conscript, he would be committing a criminal offense and be held liable. Were any medical workers willing to take the risk? This still remains to be investigated. If they were, it might be necessary to review how society views integrity.
We teach children to be honest and social education is an important link in this. While we respect students’ free development, the government should take responsibility in promoting “integrity education” in society.
Recently, a Taiwanese obstetrician-gynecologist sexually assaulted a patient while performing a “pelvic examination.” Although the court imposed a penalty on him, government agencies are failing to respond to the demands and expectations of the public in a timely manner. As more time passes, during the second and third trial of criminal cases, lawyers may find excuses to argue that the judicial procedures were flawed or that the evidence was doubtful. In the end, criminals often receive a lighter penalty after this process, which makes the public unable to trust judicial justice.
Lee Po-chang is a chair professor at Taipei Medical University’s College of Public Health.
Translated by Eddy Chang
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
RSS