國際學者給台灣總統的公開信
2009-11-13
給馬總統的公開信
馬總統鈞鑒：
在 過去一年來，來自美國、加拿大、亞洲、歐洲、澳洲等一群包括我們在內的國際學者，幾度公開向貴政府表達我們對台灣目前的一些發展和走向的顧慮及關心。二 ○○八年十一月六日及十二月二日，在致貴法務部長王清峰的信件中，我們特別指出有關台灣司法倒退、制度上的瑕疵、以及行之於在野黨成員的司法追究之濫權。
今年一月二十一日和五月二十一日，我們特撰兩封公開信給您馬總統，明確表達我們對司法公正、新聞自由及民主制衡的關切。新聞局長蘇俊賓給我們的回覆沒有針對問題核心；我們也未見到貴政府拿出具體行動解決問題，令人深感遺憾。
此 後的一些後續發展—包括正面和負面的—再次激勵我們向您表達我們的意見。我們必須重申：我們之所以提出這些意見，是因為我們強力支持台灣的民主，並深深關 切、在意並希望看到這個民主自由的國家得以持續茁長。我們也強調，我們不偏袒島內任何一方的政治爭議，而是完全著眼於台灣的國際形象及信譽。
有賴於台灣人民的努力和堅持，台灣在二十年前開始轉型成為一個民主社會。這項成就值得肯定，我們也堅信「民主」是台灣在建立並強化其國際關係上，以及阻止外權干涉，最大的王牌。
我 們相信您和我們有共識—台灣的民主幼苗能夠成長茁壯，只有靠自由民主正義及人權的基本原則來培育，建立權責分明，公開透明的政治制度。此認知亦符合您今年 簽署，經立法院核准的兩項聯合國人權條款的內容和精神，希望能更進一步依照國際法律協會的建議制定為法律，在台灣實行。
在過去二十年，台灣在這些方面有相當的進步；也因為如此，我們才會對台灣今日的司法倒退、政治制衡力退化及民主、新聞自由受損而深感失望。在國際人權組織，如自由之家及無國界記者等，所發表的年度報告中，台灣的排名退步，恰恰反映了上述種種的負面發展。
同樣的，這些負面發展也受到其他國際學者及友台人士的關注，尤其是有關針對陳前總統司法案件的處理，包括審理過程中的瑕疵、辦案人員明顯缺乏中立、無數的偵查延期、以及對前朝政府官員彈劾的手段。為此我們再次訴請您確保司法公正、公平、公義。
今天當您的政府正把台灣帶向與中國更密切的經濟合作路上，建立在自由民主正義及人權基本原則上的權責分明、公開透明的政治制度更形重要。我們肯定降低台海的緊張關係，但也要強調台灣得來不易的民主及人權不容因此而被犧牲。
與 對岸強鄰關係改善的過程必須是公開的、審慎的、並遵循民主的過程，與立法院及在野黨有完全溝通，對人民完全公開。我們欣聞貴政府官員公開表示：與中國的任 何協議都必須得到國內的共識，以及為國際社會所接受。我們深信與中國對話的過程應會是公開的，諮詢性的，並尊重台灣近二十年發展的民主傳統為前提而進行。
我們在此強調，一個國家的成長及繁榮，其經濟及政治關係必須保持國際多元化。但是與單一的鄰國過度親密，將迫使該國面臨此單一鄰國的不安穩所帶來的風險，尤其當此鄰國是一個藐視台灣民主成就的極權國家，此威脅更形嚴重。
馬總統，我們以國際學者的身分觀察台灣多年，支持並肯定台灣的民主成就，深信台灣有資格更加被國際社會接納為平等的一員。要達到此目標，唯一的方式是台灣本身確保其民主成果，其主權、人權及基本自由有保障，社會民主更加鞏固，台灣才有能力面對未來的挑戰。
順頌 鈞安
二○○九年十一月六日
前美國在台協會主席白樂崎等31人
1.Nat Bellocchi白樂崎〔前美國在台協會主席﹞
2.Coen Blaauw昆布勞﹝美國台灣人公共事務會 ﹞
3.Gordon G. Chang﹝「即將崩潰的中國」作者﹞
4.Peter Chow周鉅原﹝美國紐約市立學院經濟學教授﹞
5.Stephane Corcuff﹝法國里昂大學「中國和台灣研究」政治學副教授﹞
6.Michael Danielsen﹝丹麥哥本哈根「台灣一角」主席 ﹞
7.June Teufel Dreyer金德芳﹝美國邁阿密大學政治學教授﹞
8.Edward Friedman ﹝美國威斯康辛大學政治學和東亞研究教授﹞
9.Michael Rand Hoare﹝英國倫敦大學退休副教授﹞
10.Christopher R. Hughes ﹝英國倫敦政經學院教授 ﹞
11.Thomas G. Hughes ﹝美國前參議員斐爾國會辦公室主任﹞
12.Terri Giles賈泰麗﹝美國福爾摩莎基金會執行長﹞
13.Bruce Jacobs家柏 ﹝澳洲蒙納許大學亞洲語言和研究教授﹞
14.Richard C. Kagan柯耕義﹝美國翰林大學教授歷史系榮譽教授﹞
15.Jerome F. Keating祈潤夫﹝國立台北大學副教授（已退休）﹞
16.David Kilgour﹝加拿大前國會議員、亞太國務卿﹞
[UTF-8?]17.Andr矇 [UTF-8?]Lalibert矇儮㎡??踹之皜亙云?臬之摮豢粭瘝餃飛?舀??桡?
18.Perry Link 林培瑞 （美國普林斯頓大學東亞研究所退休教授﹞
19.Daniel Lynch ﹝美國南加州大學副教授﹞
20.Liu Shih-Chung劉世忠﹝美國布魯金斯研究院客座研究員﹞
21.Victor H. Mair﹝美國賓夕法尼亞大學中國語言和文學系教授﹞
22.Donald Rodgers﹝美國德州奧斯汀大學政治學副教授﹞
23.Christian Schafferer﹝僑光科技大學國際貿易系副教授，奧地利東亞研究協會主任，「當代東亞」主編﹞
24.Scott Simon ﹝加拿大渥太華大學副教授﹞
25.Michael Stainton﹝加拿大多倫多York Center for Asia Research﹞
26.Peter Tague﹝美國喬治城大學法律系教授﹞
27.John Tkacik譚慎格﹝前美國傳統基金會資深研究員及前美國務院台灣事務協調處官員﹞
28.Arthur Waldron林蔚﹝美國賓夕法尼亞大學國際關係學教授﹞
29.Vincent Wei-cheng Wang王維正﹝美國里奇蒙大學政治學教授﹞
30.Gerrit van der Wees韋傑理﹝台灣公報編輯﹞
31.Stephen Yates葉望輝 ﹝DC Asia諮詢顧問團主席，前美國副總統國家安全政策顧問﹞
An open letter to Taiwan’s president
Friday, Nov 13, 2009, Page 8
Dear President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九),
During the past year, we, the undersigned — scholars and writers from the US, Canada, Asia, Europe and Australia — have publicly expressed to your government our concerns about a number of trends and developments in Taiwan. On Nov. 6, 2008, and again on Dec. 2 in letters to Minister of Justice Wang Ching-feng (王清峰), we focused on the issues of erosion of justice, significant flaws in the judicial system and judicial abuses against members of the democratic opposition.
On Jan. 21, 2009, and again on May 21, we addressed two open letters to you, Mr. President, expressing concern about the fairness of the judicial system, as well as erosion of press freedom and democratic checks and balances.
We regret to say that the responses received from Government Information Office (GIO) Minister Su Jun-pin (蘇俊賓) did not adequately address the issues raised, nor have we seen any substantive ameliorative steps taken to correct the problems.
Since then, a number of developments have taken place — some positive and some negative — which prompted us to write to you again to express our views on these issues. We wish to reiterate that we raise these points as strong international supporters of Taiwan’s democracy who care deeply about the country and its future as a free and democratic nation.
We also emphasize that we do not take sides in internal political debates, but do have Taiwan’s international image and credibility as an international partner in mind. Because of the hard work and perseverance of the Taiwanese people, Taiwan was able to make the transition to democracy two decades ago.
We applaud this achievement and strongly believe that this basic fact, democracy, is the strongest card Taiwan can play in building and strengthening its relations with other countries around the world and the strongest protection against outside interference in Taiwan’s internal affairs.
We are sure that you would agree with us that Taiwan’s young democracy can only grow and prosper if it is nurtured through good governance, accountability and transparency based on the fundamental principles of freedom, democracy, justice and human rights. This would also adhere to both the letter and spirit of the two UN human rights covenants signed by you and ratified by the Legislative Yuan, and be enhanced by the implementation of these covenants into national law in accordance with the advice of the International Commission of Jurists.
During the past two decades, Taiwan has made major progress in each of these areas. It thus has been a disappointment for us to see an erosion of justice, a weakening of checks and balances in the democratic system and a decline in press freedom in Taiwan.
These trends are reflected in the significantly downward ratings Taiwan received in the annual reports of international organizations such as Freedom House and Reporters without Borders.
They are also reflected in the expressions of concern by international scholars and friends of Taiwan related to the flaws in the judicial proceedings against former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) and the apparent lack of neutrality in the continuing “investigations” and indictments of other prominent members of the former DPP government. We thus appeal to you again to ensure that measures are taken to ensure the impartiality and fairness of the judiciary.
Good governance, accountability and transparency based on the fundamental principles of freedom, democracy, justice and human rights are all the more essential now that your government is moving Taiwan on a path of closer economic ties with China. We believe that a decrease of tension across the Taiwan Strait would indeed be welcome, but emphasize that this should not be done at the expense of the hard-won democracy and human rights in Taiwan itself.
Thus, the process of improving relations with your large neighbor across the Taiwan Strait needs to be an open, deliberative and democratic process, in full consultation with both the Legislative Yuan and the democratic opposition, and fully transparent to the general public.
We are thus pleased to hear that officials of your government have stated that any agreement with China would need to have both a domestic consensus, including approval by the Legislative Yuan, and acceptance by the international community.
We trust this process will be open and consultative in ways that respect the democratic traditions begun so promisingly two decades ago. Indeed, we emphasize that a country can only grow and prosper if it has diversified ties — economically and politically — to other countries.
Too close an embrace with one neighbor will expose that country to the risks of volatility in the neighboring country, in particular if that neighbor remains authoritarian and openly disrespectful of Taiwan’s democratic achievements.
Mr. President, we wish to emphasize again that, as international scholars and writers who have followed, supported and applauded Taiwan’s impressive transition to democracy, we feel strongly that Taiwan should be more fully accepted by the international community as a full and equal partner.
This can only be achieved if Taiwan ensures that its democratic achievements are safeguarded, that its sovereignty, human rights and fundamental freedoms are protected, and that the democratic fabric of society is strengthened so the country is ready to meet the challenges ahead.
Respectfully yours,
NAT BELLOCCHI
Former chairman, American Institute in Taiwan
COEN BLAAUW
Formosan Association for Public Affairs, Washington
GORDON CHANG
Author, “The Coming Collapse of China”
EDWARD FRIEDMAN
Professor of political science and East Asian studies, University of Wisconsin
PETER CHOW
Professor of economics, City College of New York
STEPHANE CORCUFF
Associate professor of political science, China and Taiwan studies,
University of Lyon
MICHAEL DANIELSEN
Chairman, Taiwan Corner, Copenhagen
JUNE TEUFEL DREYER
Professor of political science, University of Miami
JOHN TKACIK
Former senior research fellow at The Heritage Foundation and former officer at the Taiwan Coordination Desk, Department of State, Washington
TERRI GILES
Executive director, Formosa Foundation, Los Angeles
MICHAEL RAND HOARE
Emeritus reader at the University of London
CHRISTOPHER HUGHES
Professor of international relations, London School of Economics and Political Science
THOMAS HUGHES
Former chief of staff to the late senator Claiborne Pell, Washington
BRUCE JACOBS
Professor of Asian languages and studies, Monash University
RICHARD KAGAN
Professor emeritus of history, Hamline University
JEROME KEATING
Associate professor, National Taipei University (retired). David Kilgour
Former member of parliament and secretary of state for Asia-Pacific
(2002-2003), Canada
ANDRE LALIBERTE
Associate professor, School of Political Studies,
University of Ottawa
DANIEL LYNCH
Associate professor, School of International Relations,
University of Southern California
LIU SHIH-CHUNG
Visiting fellow, The Brookings Institution, Washington
VICTOR MAIR
Professor of Chinese language and literature, University of Pennsylvania
DONALD RODGERS
Associate professor of political science, Austin College
CHRISTIAN SCHAFFERER
Associate professor, Department of International Trade, Overseas Chinese Institute of Technology, chair of Austrian Association of East Asian Studies
SCOTT SIMON
Associate professor, University of Ottawa, Canada
MICHAEL STAINTON
York Center for Asia Research, Toronto
PERRY LINK
Professor emeritus of
East Asian Studies,
Princeton University
PETER TAGUE
Professor of law,
Georgetown University
ARTHUR WALDRON
Lauder professor of international relations, University of Pennsylvania
VINCENT WEI-CHENG WANG
Professor of political science, University of Richmond
GERRIT VAN DER WEES
Editor of “Taiwan Communique,” Washington
STEPHEN YATES
President of DC Asia Advisory and former deputy assistant to the US vice president for national security affairs.
給台灣總統公開信
May 21, 2009,
敬愛的馬總統，
在你任期滿一週年的現在，我們這一群來自美國、加拿大、歐洲和澳大利亞的學者與作家，也就是在本文文末署名的人，想針對台灣的一些趨勢以及幾個特別事件的發展情勢，公開對你提出我們的憂慮。
我們深切關心台灣這一塊土地，並且希望她在未來成為一個自由的單一民族國家，才會以台灣民主政治的國際支持者的身分，提出這些議題。相信你還記得，我們曾 經在三個不同的時機提出我們的憂慮，最近的一次是在2009年01月17日，在一封給你，總統先生，的公開信中，我們對於台灣的司法系統的公正性，表達了 我們的憂慮。
不論是來自新聞局長蘇俊賓的回應，還是那些令人感到苦惱的、有瑕疵的、不公平的司法程序至今仍未終止（特別是前總統陳水扁的案子），都讓我們的憂慮無法消減。
我 們要再一次聲明，任何疑似貪污事件都應被調查，但是我們也要強調，整個司法程序必須絕對公平、公正。在前總統這個案子，很明顯地，這個訴訟案件受到政治 偏見的嚴重破壞，而且，前總統正遭受惡劣的對待，這全是為了報復他在總統任內所持的政治觀點與立場。對一個新生而脆弱的民主政體如台灣，這種報復舉動是個 不好的預兆。
我 們認為需要突顯的第二個議題是媒體自由。儘管先前有國際性組織例如「保護記者委員會」和「自由之家」提出關注，仍然持續有媒體自由遭受你的行政部門侵害 的報告出現。一個最好的例子就是，最近一則另人不安的報告指出，財團法人中央通訊社的職員接到指示只能針對你的行政團隊的政策發表正面報導，而含有批評你 的行政團隊或中國的新聞內容都被刪除。
身為自由民主台灣的支持者，對於總部位於紐約的「自由之家」有關新聞自由度的年度報告中，台灣的排名由第32名跌落至第43名， 我們感到很沮喪。除此之 外，當報導指出，與中國有緊密關係的團體正以金錢收買的方式進入台灣媒體圈，並且獲得主要媒體例如中國時報集團的主控權時，令我們覺得驚惶失措。我們必須 提醒自己，中國仍是一個威權國家，長期以來控制著新聞媒體。就長遠來看，介入台灣自由媒體的中國資金將對好不容易獲得的新聞自由造成傷害。
這 引領我們進入第三個議題：目前政府所採行的與中國重建友好關係的方式。雖然居住於台灣或是其他國家的大多數人都同意「台灣海峽緊張情勢的和緩是有益 的」，採用適合一個民主國家的方式是很重要的：舉辦公開的、各界人士全面參與的辯論會，再配合投票表決，來決定適合的方式。唯有透過充分透明的、真誠的對 話（包括在立法院與民間），才能得到一個被大多數人民所支持的方案。
目前政府與中國有關的決策過程欠缺透明度與真誠對話。各種決定及協議都是政府秘密決定後再草率地向大眾公布。立法院的功能似乎受到閹割，對各項協議（例如 經濟合作架構協議，ECFA） 的型式或內容參與不多。行政部門只是把已經與中華人民共和國協商好的協議文本送到立法院，幾乎不讓立法院有對協議的優缺點進 行討論的機會。這種做法破壞了權力制衡的機制，而權力互相制衡正是維繫成熟民主政治的基礎。我們想指出，最近的民意調查顯示，大多數人贊成對經濟合作架構 協議（ECFA）進行公民投票，並且希望立法院對中國政策進行更周嚴的監督。
總統先生，身為一群於過去20多 年來持續關注台灣令人欽佩的民主發展的國際學者與作者，我們知道在台灣當地，「台灣與中國的關係」是一個敏感的議題。執行 任何與中國重建友好關係的方案時，必須先確定既有的民主成果獲得保障、台灣內部政治分裂情形能改善、而且台灣的主權、人權和民主體制都能獲得保護與強化。
然而，在過去一年來，我們看到你的執政團隊所提出的政策的執行方式，正引發一股深切的焦慮，許多20多年前獻身台灣民主發展的人尤其感到焦慮。這股焦慮可由星期天在高雄與台北舉行的遊行有許多人參與而得到印證。
我們也看見，由於欠缺透明度與民主制衡機制，社會的對立更嚴重了。許多觀察家相信，目前與中國重建友好關係的做法，正讓台灣的主權、民主政治和自由付出代價。那些批評你的政策的人所遭受的司法訴訟與警察對待方式，讓某些人回想起過去的戒嚴時代。
因 此（也就是在考慮到上述的人民焦慮感與社會分化對立的事實），「象徵」就很重要了。你的行政團隊把「台灣民主紀念館」改回原名「中正紀念堂」，這件事對 消除焦慮和緩和社會對立一點幫助也沒有。大幅度刪減新店「台灣人權景美園區」的預算，並把它改為一個「文化」園區，並不能增加你的支持度。目前打算對集會 遊行法所做的修改，不但沒有強化言論自由，反而侵害抗議者的自由，這將使得焦慮和社會對立更加惡化。
總統先生，我們呼籲你採取能緩和上述憂慮事項的行動。第一步是發動並執行司法制度的改革，讓被告的人權獲得保障並且確保能被公平審判。第二步是保證絕對的新聞自由，灌輸媒體工作者要有實踐最高標準的決心。
第三，與中國發展友好關係時，必須讓台灣人民有充分的決定權來決定他們的未來是生活在一個自由民主的國家。讓中國對台灣的影響力越來越大的各項秘密協議對台灣的前途有害，而且會摧毀社會的民主架構。
複雜的歷史因素，讓台灣在過去沒有機會成為被世界各國所承認的正常國家。我們確信台灣人民對他們的民主一直努力不懈，而且國際社會將會接受台灣成為它的一員。你的各項作為與政策能夠幫助這個島嶼以及它的島民朝正確的方向前進。我們強烈呼籲你依照我們所建議的來作。
Respectfully yours,
敬上
信的連署人:
1.Nat Bellocchi 白樂崎（前美國在台協會理事主席）
2.Coen Blaauw （昆布勞，荷蘭人。1989年起在FAPA總部工作，負責遊說美國國會議員。2006年成為台灣女婿。）
3.Stephane CORCUFF高格孚，法國人。曾任法國現代中國研究中心台北分部研究員，以及法國在台協會新聞組長。）Associate Professor of Political Science, China and Taiwan Studies, University of Lyon （法國里昂第二大學高等政治學院助理教授）
4.Gordon G. Chang （章家敦，華裔美國人。曾因任職於跨國法律事務所，先後在香港、上海居住20年。）Author, The Coming Collapse of China（《中國即將崩潰》一書的作者）
5.June Teufel Dreyer （金德芳）（美國 邁阿密大學 政治系 教授）
6.Michael Danielsen （麥可‧丹尼爾森）（台灣壹角主席。設立於丹麥哥本哈根的「台灣壹角」是一個關注台灣的非官方組織）
7.Terri Giles （賈泰麗）（美國福爾摩莎基金會執行長‧洛杉磯）
8.Bruce Jacobs （家博）（澳洲 蒙那許大學 亞洲語言及研究學系 教授）
9.Richard C. Kagan （理查德‧可根）（美國 漢姆萊大學 歷史系 名譽退休教授）
10.Jerome F. Keating （祈夫潤）（作家及國立台北大學 退休副教授）
11.David Kilgour （大衛‧喬高）（前加拿大國會議員及前加拿大亞太司司長）
12.Liu Shih-Chung （劉世忠，曾任前總統陳水扁外交幕僚以及中華民國外交部研究設計委員會副主任委員）（美國華府智庫「布魯金斯研究所」訪問學者）
13.Michael Rand Hoare （郝任德）（英國 倫敦大學 名譽退休高級講師）
14.Victor H. Mair （梅維恆）（美國 賓州大學 中國語文學 教授）
15.Donald Rodgers （羅曉唐）（美國 德州 奧斯汀學院 政治系 副教授）
16.Terence Russell （羅德仁）（加拿大 曼尼托巴大學 中國語文學系 副教授）
18.Christian Schafferer （夏福樂） （僑光技術學院 國際貿易系 副教授；期刊《Journal of Contemporary Eastern Asia》的主編，）
19.Michael Stainton （史邁克，加拿大人。於1980年至1991年被派駐台灣基督長老教會，擔任原住民宣教工作，從此與台灣結下不解之緣。）York Center for Asia Research, Toronto, Canada （加拿大 多倫多 約克大學 亞洲研究中心 助理研究員）
20.Peter Chow （周鉅原）（美國 紐約市立大學 城市學院 經濟學系 教授）
21.Peter Tague （美國 喬治城大學 法律系 教授）
22John J. Tkacik Jr. （譚慎格）（前美國華盛頓「傳統基金會」資深研究員）
23.Arthur Waldron （林霨）L（美國賓州大學歷史學系 國際關係學 榮譽教授）
24.Vincent Wei-Cheng Wang （王維正）P （美國 里奇蒙大學 政治系 教授）
25.Gerrit van Der Wees （韋傑理）（《台灣公報》主編）
26,Michael Yahuda （亞呼達）（倫敦經濟學院 名譽退休教授，及美國 喬治華盛頓大學 訪問學者）
27.Stephen Yates （葉望輝）（美國 「華府亞洲顧問公司」總裁，及前美國副總統辦公室副國家安全助理）
Open letter to Taiwan’s president
Thursday, May 21, 2009, Page 8
Dear President Ma,
On the occasion of the first anniversary of your presidency, we, the undersigned, scholars and writers from the US, Canada, Europe and Australia, wish to publicly address our concerns to you about a number of trends in Taiwan, as well as several specific developments.
We raise these issues as international supporters of Taiwan’s democracy who care deeply about the country and its future as a free and democratic nation-state. As you recall, we voiced concerns on three previous occasions, most recently in a letter to you, Mr President, dated Jan. 17, 2009, in which we expressed our concern regarding the fairness of the judicial system in Taiwan.
These concerns have not been alleviated by either the response from Government Information Office Minister Su Jun-pin (蘇俊賓) or the cessation of troubling, flawed and partial judicial proceedings, in particular involving the case of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁).
We reiterate that any alleged corruption must be investigated, but emphasize that the judicial process needs to be scrupulously fair and impartial. In the case of the former president, it is evident that the prosecution is heavily tainted by political bias, and that the former president is being treated badly out of spite for the political views and the positions he took during his presidency. Such retribution does not bode well for a young and fragile democracy, as Taiwan is.
The second issue that we feel we need to highlight is press freedom. In spite of earlier expressions of concern by international organizations such as the Committee to Protect Journalists and Freedom House, there continue to be reports of impingement on press freedom by your administration. A case in point is the recent disturbing report that Central News Agency staff were instructed to write only “positive” stories about the policies of your administration, and that reports containing criticism of your administration or China were excised.
As supporters of a free and democratic Taiwan it is disheartening to see that in the annual report on press freedom by the New York-based Freedom House, Taiwan dropped from 32nd to 43rd place. In addition, it is disconcerting to see reports that groups with close ties to China are buying their way into Taiwan’s media circles, gaining a controlling voice in major publications such as the China Times. We need to remind ourselves that China is still an authoritarian state with a long history of control of the news media. Its financial influence in Taiwan’s free press will in the long run be detrimental to hard-won freedoms.
This leads us to a third general issue: the means by which rapprochement with China is being pursued. While most people in Taiwan and overseas agree that a reduction of tension in the Taiwan Strait is beneficial, it is crucial to do this in a manner befitting a democratic nation: with openness and full public debate. Only if there is sufficient transparency and true dialogue — both in the Legislative Yuan and in society as a whole — will the result be supported by a significant majority of the people.
Transparency and true dialogue have been lacking in the process. Decisions and agreements are arrived at in secrecy and then simply announced to the public. The Legislative Yuan seems to have been sidelined, having little input in the form or content of the agreements, such as the proposed economic cooperation framework agreement (ECFA). The administration simply sends to the legislature the texts agreed to in the negotiations with the People’s Republic of China, allowing virtually no possibility of discussion of the pros and cons of such agreements. This undermines the system of checks and balances, which is so essential to a mature democracy. We may mention that recent opinion polls show overwhelming support for a referendum on an ECFA and for better legislative oversight of China policy.
Mr President, as international scholars and writers who have followed Taiwan’s impressive transition to democracy during the past two decades, we know the sensitivity in Taiwan of the issue of relations with China. Rapprochement needs to be carried out in a way that ensures that the achievements of the democratic movement are safeguarded, that the political divide within Taiwan is reduced and that Taiwan’s sovereignty, human rights and democracy are protected and strengthened.
However, during the past year we have seen that the policies of your administration are being implemented in a way that is causing deep anxiety, particularly among many who fought for Taiwan’s democracy two decades ago. This was evident in the large-scale rallies held in Taipei and Kaohsiung on Sunday.
We have also seen a further polarization in society due to the lack of transparency and democratic checks and balances. Many observers believe that the rapprochement with China has occurred at the expense of Taiwan’s sovereignty, democracy and freedoms. To some, the judicial practices and police behavior toward those who criticize your policies are even reminiscent of the dark days of martial law.
In this respect, symbols are important. It does not help that your administration has renamed National Taiwan Democracy Memorial Hall in Taipei back to Chiang Kai-shek Memorial Hall. It doesn’t bolster your case that the funding for the Chingmei Human Rights Memorial in Sindian (新店) has been cut drastically and that the location is being turned into a “cultural” park. It doesn’t help that changes are being made to the Assembly and Parade Act (集會遊行法) that infringe on freedoms of protesters instead of enhancing freedom of speech.
Mr President, we appeal to you to take measures that alleviate these concerns. A first step would be to initiate and implement reforms in the judicial system that safeguard the human rights of the accused and ensure a fair trial. A second step would be to guarantee complete press freedom, and instill in those engaged in the media the determination to live up to the highest standards.
Thirdly, rapprochement with China needs to be brought about in such a way that the people of Taiwan have a full say in determining their future as a free and democratic nation. Closed-door deals that bring Taiwan increasingly into China’s sphere of influence are detrimental to Taiwan’s future and undermine the democratic fabric of society.
Due to its complex history, Taiwan has not had the opportunity to be accepted as a full and equal member of the international family of nations. We believe the people of Taiwan have worked hard for their democracy, and that the international community should accept Taiwan in its midst. Your actions and policies can help the island and its people move in the right direction. We urge you to do so.
Respectfully yours,
NAT BELLOCCHI
Former chairman, American Institute in Taiwan
COEN BLAAUW
Formosan Association for Public Affairs, Washington
STéPHANE CORCUFF
Associate Professor of Political Science, China and Taiwan Studies, University of Lyon
GORDON G. CHANG
Author, The Coming Collapse of China June Teufel Dreyer
Professor of Political Science, University of Miami
MICHAEL DANIELSEN
Chairman, Taiwan Corner, Copenhagen, Denmark
TERRI GILES
Executive Director, Formosa Foundation, Los Angeles
BRUCE JACOBS
Professor of Asian Languages and Studies, Monash University
RICHARD C. KAGAN
Professor Emeritus of History, Hamline University
JEROME F. KEATING
Author and associate professor (ret.),
National Taipei University
DAVID KILGOUR
Former Canadian member of parliament and secretary of state for the Asia-Pacific
LIU SHIH-CHUNG
Visiting Fellow, The Brookings Institution, Washington
MICHAEL RAND HOARE
Emeritus Reader at the University of London, Great Britain
VICTOR H. MAIR
Professor of Chinese Language and Literature,
University of Pennsylvania
DONALD RODGERS
Associate Professor of Political Science, Austin College
TERENCE RUSSELL
Associate Professor of Chinese Language and Literature, University of Manitoba
CHRISTIAN SCHAFFERER
Associate Professor, Department of International Trade, Overseas Chinese Institute of Technology; and Editor, Journal of Contemporary Eastern Asia
MICHAEL STAINTON
York Center for Asia Research, Toronto, Canada
PETER CHOW
Professor of Economics, City College of New York
PETER TAGUE
Professor of Law,Georgetown University
JOHN J. TKACIK JR.
Former senior research
fellow, The Heritage
Foundation, Washington
Arthur Waldron
Lauder Professor of International Relations, University of Pennsylvania
VINCENT WEI-CHENG WANG
Professor of Political Science, University of Richmond
GERRIT VAN DER WEES
Editor, Taiwan Communiqué
MICHAEL YAHUDA
Professor Emeritus, London School of Economics, and
Visiting Scholar, George
Washington University
STEPHEN YATES
President, DC Asia Advisory, and former deputy assistant to the US vice president for national security affairs
Political arrests and detentions in Taiwan
Erosion of Justice in Taiwan
Eroding justice: Open letter No. 3
17 January 2009
Dear President Ma,
We the undersigned, scholars and writers from the US, Canada, Europe and Australia, consider ourselves long-time supporters of a democratic Taiwan. We write to express our concern regarding the erosion of the judicial system in Taiwan during the past few months.
On two previous occasions we have publicly expressed our concerns to Justice Minister Wang Ching-feng, but the Minister's responses are troubling in their persistent failure to acknowledge that there even is a problem, and in their attitude of denial that the judicial process is flawed and partial. We trust that our raising our concerns with you as President will be treated as advice from international supporters of Taiwan's democracy who care deeply about the country and its future as a free and democratic nation.
First we may mention the fact that your administration has not yet acted upon recommendations - made both by Freedom House and Amnesty International - to conduct an independent inquiry into the events surrounding the visit of Chinese envoy Chen Yunlin, and in particular the police behavior and infringements on basic freedoms. The establishment of a scrupulously neutral commission is essential if there is to be a fair and objective conclusion on the disturbances that occurred during the Chen Yunlin visit.
Second, we are concerned about the legal proceedings in the case of former President Chen Shui-bian. The switch of the case from a three-panel court that released him on his own cognizance on December 13th to a court that subsequently re-incarcerated him on December 25th - both Christmas Day and Constitution Day -- seems to have resulted from political pressure from KMT members of the Legislative Yuan. In his commentary in the South China Morning Post of January 8th 2009, Prof. Jerome Cohen presented details of such political interference in the judicial system, while the Associated Press on January 4th also gave incisive insights in the process that took place.
Third, we are deeply concerned by the widespread pattern of leaks to the media regarding ongoing cases - leaks, which because of their content and nature can only have come from the prosecutors' offices. As was reported by the Associated Press on January 4th 2009, prominent observers in Taiwan such as Prof. Wang Yeh-lih of National Taiwan University charge that these leaks come from prosecutors, who "…consistently violated the principle of guarding the details of investigations during the Chen case." This pattern of behaviour displays a distinct bias in the judicial system and a disregard for fair and impartial processes.
The lack of attention to professional judicial standards reached a new low with the skit by several prosecutors who satirized those whom they are prosecuting. We are disturbed by Minister Wang's defending this as "just for fun". Press agencies quote the Minister as saying: "It was just a play to help everybody relax. There's no reason to take it too seriously."In our view the actions by the prosecutors and the comment by Minister Wang display a lack of judicial professionalism and political neutrality.
We reiterate that any cases of alleged corruption must be investigated, and that if the defendants are found guilty in a scrupulously impartial process, they should receive just punishment after trial. We thus emphasize that the political neutrality of the judicial system is a fundamental element in a democracy. The examples mentioned above indicate that the investigative process has been conducted and sensationalized to the extent that both the right of the accused to a fair trial, and the presumption of innocence have been seriously jeopardized. Justice through the rule of law is essential to Taiwan's efforts to consolidate democracy and protect fundamental human rights.
In addition to the harm done to the personas of those accused, the international image of Taiwan has suffered. A president of a country bears political responsibility for the conduct of his subordinates' actions, and we therefore urge immediate and decisive action to correct the severe flaws in the process that are staining the national honor, perhaps irreparably.
Taiwan's judicial system must be not only above suspicion but even above the appearance of suspicion of partiality and political bias. We appeal to you, Mr. President, to restore the credibility of the judicial system in Taiwan and ensure that your government and its judiciary and parliamentary institutions safeguard the full democracy, human rights and freedom of expression, for which the Taiwanese people have worked so hard during the past two decades.
Respectfully yours,
Signatories:
Names of those who joined later are marked with a *
- Ambassador Nat Bellocchi, former Chairman of the American Institute in Taiwan
- Coen Blaauw, Formosan Association for Public Affairs, Washington DC
- Stéphane Corcuff, Associate Professor of Political Science, China and Taiwan Studies, University of Lyon, France
- Gordon G. Chang, author, "The Coming Collapse of China."
- David Curtis Wright, Associate Professor of History, University of Calgary
- June Teufel Dreyer, Professor of Political Science, University of Miami, Florida
- Edward Friedman, Professor of Political Science and East Asian Studies, University of Wisconsin, Madison
- Terri Giles, Executive Director, Formosa Foundation, Los Angeles
- Mark Harrison, Senior Lecturer, Head of of Chinese School of Asian Languages and Studies, University of Tasmania, , Australia
- Bruce Jacobs, Professor of Asian Languages and Studies, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
- Richard C. Kagan, Professor Emeritus of History, Hamline University, St. Paul Minnesota. Author, "Taiwan's Statesman, Lee Teng-hui and Democracy in Asia" and other works on Taiwan
- Jerome F. Keating, Associate Professor, National Taipei University (Ret.). Author, "Island in the Stream, a quick case study of Taiwan's complex history" and other works on Taiwan's history
- Hon. David Kilgour, former Member Parliament and Secretary of State for Asia-Pacific, Canada
- Daniel Lynch, Associate Professor, School of International Relations, University of Southern California
- Victor H. Mair, Professor of Chinese Language and Literature, University of Pennsylvania
- Donald Rodgers, Associate Professor of Political Science, Austin College, Texas
- Terence Russell, Professor of Chinese Language and Literature, University of Manitoba
- Christian Schafferer, Associate Professor, Department of International Trade, Overseas Chinese Institute of Technology, Chair Austrian Association of East Asian Studies, Editor Journal of Contemporary Eastern Asia *
- Randall G. Schriver, Armitage International; former Deputy Assistant Secretary for East Asia - Pacific, US Department of State *
- Michael Stainton, York Center for Asia Research, Toronto
- Peter Tague, Professor of Law, Georgetown University
- John J. Tkacik Jr., Formerly Senior Research Fellow, The Heritage Foundation, Washington DC
- Arthur Waldron, Lauder Professor of International Relations, University of Pennsylvania
- Vincent Wei-cheng Wang, Professor of Political Science, University of Richmond, Virginia
- Gerrit van der Wees, Editor Taiwan Communiqué, Washington DC
- Michael Yahuda, Professor Emeritus, the London School of Economics & Visiting Scholar, George Washington University *
- Stephen Yates, President of DC Asia Advisory and former Deputy Assistant to the Vice President for National Security Affairs
國際學者給法務部長王清峰的第二封信
01-Dec-2008
親愛的王部長：
在給台北時報11月25日出版的一封公開信，您回應了我們的聯合聲明中，關於台灣司法腐蝕的部分。我們非常感謝您認知我們關切的誠意，並對於迅速收到認真的答覆表達感謝。
根據我們現有的資料，我們仍然擔心檢察官在運用現有的法律權威所作的選擇，並強烈認為有必要進行改革。請允許我們強調一些具體的要點：
1. 「預防性拘留」的程序：此程序顯然是針對可能逃離該國的嚴重刑事案件嫌疑犯。Jerome Cohen教授在11月13日的南華早報指出：「那應該很少施行」。 然而在過去幾個星期裡，它已被全面使用，僅被用於對現任和前任民進黨政府的成員。這使人嚴重懷疑司法系統的公正。我們還要指出，所涉及的人被關押在悲慘的 情況下，他們甚至不被允許見親人。
2 .您的公開信中包含的論點，當目前和前民進黨政府官員被收押時，「都被告知已對他們提出的指控」，這是完全不正確的。當他們被收押時，他們都受到長時間的 審訊─在一些情況下長達20小時─這被稱為「釣魚」，這並不能代表正式的起訴，沒有任何法律意義。在大多數情況下，檢察機關已收集幾個月的資訊，如果他們 確實有足夠的證據證明不法行為，他們應該正式起訴，讓他們出席嚴格公正的法院。這將是民主社會可取的法治程序。
3. 你 的公開信還指出，涉案人有「與他們的律師溝通尋求法律援助的權利和能力」，卻忽略不提，在所有情況下，被收押的人與律師的討論被錄音和錄影，而警衛會做 紀錄。這一訊息立即轉發給各自的檢察官。我們不需要指出這是嚴重侵犯關於律師與當事人間之通訊保密特權的國際準則，並製造辯護困難的問題。
4 . 在洩漏給新聞界的這個問題，您的信中說，根據刑事訴訟法，正在進行的調查資料只能通過檢察官辦公室的發言人披露，未經授權的披露應受刑事追訴。事實是，在 過去幾週裡，媒體充滿了應該只有檢察官知道，關於正在進行的調查的資訊。我們可以指出一個例子，但還有許多其他例子：
在11月3日前外交部長陳唐山被詢問的幾個小時後，台灣的蘋果日報發表了一篇文章說：「因陳博士與本案有關檢察官考慮起訴」。
這個違反秘密調查原則的問題也被士林地方法院法官洪英花提出了，她在自由時報11月17日的文章強烈批評貴部的現狀和遵循的程序。
我 們也可以提到的是，非常奇怪，沒有針對洩密的檢察官採取任何措施，而我們剛剛獲悉，法務部目前正因「洩露」的訊息給新聞界，採取措施對付前總統陳 水扁的律師鄭文龍先生。該部正式發出了請求，要求台北地方法院檢察官辦公室進行調查和起訴，並對台灣律師協會發出了正式要求，要求該協會審查此案，看看是 否應該吊銷他的執照。
根據我們的理解，鄭先生提出的發言是有關前總統陳水扁對台灣的局勢和未來的看法，並表達了愛他的妻子，但沒有任何與他案件相關的訊息。我們希望您瞭解到，如果貴部繼續沿著這些路線下去，將被視為司法系統強烈政治偏見的直接確認。
5. 你的來信說，台灣的司法系統很容易受到政治操縱是不正確的。如果是這種情況，怎麼能解釋在過去幾週裡，只有民進黨的官員被拘留，並給予不人道的待遇，如手銬和漫長的審問，而明顯貪污案件的國民黨成員─包括立法院─檢察官完全不碰，甚至是用冗長的司法程序拖延？
我們也表示Cohen教授和李念祖律師的關切，他們在中國時報11月9日社論表達對預防性拘留的深切關注。該社論，李律師稱讚陳瑞仁檢察官的發言，他是專案小組成員之一，他說檢察官辦公室應「避免出現僅針對一個特定政治團體的行為」。
事實上，特偵組是民進黨當局成立，或檢察總長是被前總統陳水扁提名的並不是這裡的問題。現在的問題是，現行的制度正以非常偏袒的方式來運用。
我們也可以補充，事實上你自己都公開討論一些造成嚴重不公平情況的內容，並破壞了基本的格言，一個人在法院證明有罪之前應被視為無辜。在目前情況下很難看到涉案人員-包括陳前總統-如何能有一個公正的審判。
6. 最後，一份你在信中解釋來「背書」台灣司法系統和遵循的程序的美國國務院聲明。應該指出的是，在國際外交語言，「我們預期所有事情」這句術語的意思是「我們很擔心，並會仔細關注」。
在過去20年裡，台灣面臨著困難的國際局勢。讓台灣在世界上民主國家間有重要地位的原因是台灣的民主化。我們擔心目前台灣的司法程序被用來危及台灣民主化，並危害台灣在國際間得到的善意。
總之，我們對台灣司法的腐蝕深感不安，並表示衷心希望並期待貴國政府將保持公平和公正的司法，並迅速糾正目前的不公正。11月20日總部設在倫敦的 經濟學家社論指出，「台灣渴望正義」，我們也希望貴國政府願意提出司法改革，將台灣推向一個完全公平和公正的司法系統，獲得世界各地的民主國家尊重和敬 佩。
（按字母順序排列）
美國在台協會主席白樂崎
前華盛頓FAPA Coen Blaauw
美國東方學會東亞區理事長David Prager Branner
《即將崩潰的中國 》作者Gordon G. Chang
邁阿密大學教授June Teufel Dreyer
威斯康辛大學教授Edward Friedman
蒙納許大學教授Bruce Jacobs
Richard C. Kagan
翰林大學教授 Emeritus,
國立台北大學副教授祁夫潤 Jerome F. Keating
美國南加大國際關係學院副教授Daniel Lynch
美國賓夕法尼亞大學教授Victor H. Mair
德州奧斯汀大學副教授 Donald Rodgers
曼尼托巴大學教授Terence Russell
渥太華大學教授Scott Simon
美國傳統基金會高級研究員譚慎格
台灣公報編輯Gerrit van der Wees
美國賓夕法尼亞大學教授Arthur Waldron
美國里奇蒙大學教授Vincent Wei-cheng Wang
前美國副總統亞洲政策顧問葉望輝
Scholars Find Taiwan's Minster of Justice's Response Inadequate
Saturday November 29, by Jerome F. Keating Ph.D.
The previous posting of Taiwan's Minister of Justice's response to the JOINT STATEMENT of the scholars and writers (posted November 15) did not address the real issues of the erosion of justice in Taiwan. Ignoring numerous other protests also listed below, the Minister's response appears to hide behind the technicalities of the Constitution. Taiwan's current Constitution has many inadequacies; among them is that it was created for continental China but ill fits the island nation of Taiwan. By the Minister's implication it is so broad that it allows numerous abuses that may be technically within the letter of the law but far from the spirit and purpose of the law. For this reason it can allow the selective application to one's political opposition and still fall under the umbrella of the Constitution. For that reason, the scholars/writers of the first statement on the erosion of justice in Taiwan felt obligated to respond in specifics to the Minister's letter. That response can be found below.
November 28th 2008
The Honorable Wang Ching-feng
Minister of Justice
Taipei, Taiwan
Dear Minister Wang,
In an open letter to the Taipei Times, published on November 25th 2008, you responded to our joint statement regarding the erosion of justice in Taiwan. We appreciate your acknowledgement of the sincerity of our concerns, and are grateful to receive a prompt and serious reply. Based on the information available to us, however, we remain concerned about choices made by prosecutors in applying existing legal authority and strongly believe in the need for reform. Please allow us to highlight a number of specific points:
- The procedure of "preventive detention." This procedure is obviously intended for serious criminal cases in which the suspect is likely to flee the country. In his November 13th article in the South China Morning Post, Professor Jerome Cohen states that "it ought to be invoked rarely."
Yet, during the past weeks, it has been used across the board, and it has been used only against present and former members of the DPP government. This casts severe doubts on the impartiality of the judicial system. We also wish to point out that the people involved were detained under deplorable circumstances, and that they were not even allowed to see relatives.
- The open letter contains the argument that when they were detained, the present and former DPP government officials "were all informed of the charges that had been brought against them." This is simply not correct: when they were detained, they were subject to lengthy interrogations in some cases for up to 20 hours which bore the character of a "fishing expedition," and is not a formal indictment in any legal sense. In most cases the prosecutors had had months of time to collect information: if they did have sufficient evidence of wrong-doing, they should formally have charged the persons and let them have their day in a scrupulously impartial court of law. That would be the desirable procedure under the rule of law in a democratic society.
- The open letter also states that the persons involved had "the right and ability to communicate with their attorneys to seek legal assistance." It neglects to mention that in all cases where people were detained, the discussions with the lawyers were recorded and videotaped, while a guard took notes. This information was then immediately transmitted to the respective prosecutors. We don't need to point out that this is a grave infringement on international norms regarding the lawyer-client privilege, and makes mounting an adequate defense problematic at best.
- On the issue of leaks to the press, the letter states that under the Code of Criminal Procedure information on ongoing investigations can only be disclosed by spokespersons of the prosecutor's offices and that unauthorized disclosure is subject to criminal prosecution. The fact of the matter is that during the past weeks, the media has been filled with information on the ongoing investigations which could only have come from the prosecutors. We may point out one example, but there are ample others:
Only a few hours after former Foreign Minister Mark Chen was questioned on November 3rd, the Apple Daily (a local tabloid) ran an article that "the prosecutors are thinking of charging Dr. Chen in relation to the case."
The issue of violation of the principle of secret investigation was also raised by Shih Lin District Court Judge Hung Ing-hua, who strongly criticized the present situation and procedures followed by your Ministry in an article in the "Liberty Times" on November 17th 2008.
We may also mention that we find it highly peculiar that no steps whatsoever have been taken against the various prosecutors who leaked information, while we just learned that your ministry is now taking steps against Mr. Cheng Wen-long, the lawyer for former President Chen Shui-bian, who presumably "leaked" information to the press. Your Ministry sent a formal request to the Taipei District Prosecutor's Office asking the office to investigate and prosecute, and also sent a formal request to Taiwan Lawyer's Association and asked the association to review the case and see whether Cheng should have his license revoked.
It is our understanding that the statements Mr. Cheng made were in relation to former President Chen's views on Taiwan's situation and its future, and an expression of love for his wife, but did not have any bearing on the case against him. We hope your Excellency realizes that if you proceed along these lines, this will be perceived as a direct confirmation of the strong political bias of the judicial system.
- The letter states that it is untrue that Taiwan's judicial system is susceptible to political manipulation. If this is the case, how can it be explained that in the past weeks, only DPP officials have been detained and given inhumane treatment such as handcuffing and lengthy questioning, while obvious cases of corruption by members of the KMT - including in the Legislative Yuan - are left untouched by the prosecutors or at best stalled in the judicial process?
We may also refer to expressions of concern by Prof. Jerome Cohen and by lawyer Nigel Li, who expressed his deep concerns about the preventive detentions in an editorial in the "China Times" on November 9, 2008. In his editorial, Mr. Li praised the remarks made by prosecutor Chen Rui-ren, who was part of the legal team prosecuting the special fund cases, that the prosecutors' offices should "avoid the appearance of targeting only one particular political group."
The fact that the Special Investigation Task Force was set up under the DPP Administration or that the prosecutor general was nominated by President Chen is not at issue here. The problem is that the present system is being used in a very partial fashion.
We may add that the fact that you yourself have publicly discussed the content of the cases does create a serious imbalance in the playing field, and undermines the basic dictum that a person should be considered innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Under the present circumstances it is hard to see how the persons involved including former President Chen Shui-bian can have a fair trial in Taiwan.
- Lastly, you take the statement by the US State Department as an "endorsement" of Taiwan's legal system and the procedures followed. You might want to note that in international diplomatic language, the term we have every expectation means we are concerned and we will watch the situation closely.
For the past two decades, Taiwan has faced a difficult situation internationally. What has given Taiwan important credibility in Western democratic countries around the world has been its democratization. We fear that the current judicial procedures being used in Taiwan endanger this democratization, and endanger the goodwill that Taiwan has developed internationally.
In conclusion: we do remain deeply disturbed by the erosion of justice in Taiwan, and express the sincere hope and expectation that your government will maintain fair and impartial judicial practices and quickly correct the present injustices. As an editorial in the November 20th issue of the London-based Economist indicated, Taiwan is hungry for justice, and we also hope that your government will be willing to initiate judicial reform which would move Taiwan towards a fully fair and impartial judicial system which earns the respect and admiration from other democratic countries around the world.
Respectfully yours,
Signatories of the November 4th Joint Statement
- Nat Bellocchi, former Chairman of the American Institute in Taiwan
- Julian Baum, former Taiwan Bureau Chief, Far Eastern Economic Review
- Coen Blaauw, Formosan Association for Public Affairs, Washington DC
- Stéphane Corcuff, Associate Professor of Political Science, China and Taiwan Studies, University of Lyon, France *
- Gordon G. Chang, author, "The Coming Collapse of China."
- David Curtis Wright, Associate Professor of History, University of Calgary
- June Teufel Dreyer, Professor of Political Science, University of Miami, Florida
- Edward Friedman, Professor of Political Science and East Asian Studies, University of Wisconsin, Madison
- Mark Harrison, Senior Lecturer, Head of Chinese School of Asian Languages and Studies, University of Tasmania, Australia*
- Bruce Jacobs, Professor of Asian Languages and Studies, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
- Richard C. Kagan, Professor Emeritus of History, Hamline University, St. Paul Minnesota
- Jerome F. Keating, Associate Professor, National Taipei University (Ret.). Author, "Island in the Stream, a Quick Case Study of Taiwan's Complex History" and other works on Taiwan
- Daniel Lynch, Associate Professor, School of International Relations, University of Southern California
- Victor H. Mair, Professor of Chinese Language and Literature, University of Pennsylvania
- Donald Rodgers, Associate Professor of Political Science, Austin College, Texas
- Terence Russell, Professor of Chinese Language and Literature, University of Manitoba
- Scott Simon, Professor of Sociology and Anthropology, University of Ottawa
- Peter Tague, Professor of Law, Georgetown University
- John J. Tkacik Jr., Senior Research Fellow, The Heritage Foundation, Washington DC
- Vincent Wei-cheng Wang, Professor of Political Science, University of Richmond, Virginia
- Arthur Waldron, Lauder Professor of International Relations, University of Pennsylvania
- Gerrit van der Wees, Editor Taiwan Communiqué, Washington DC
- Stephen Yates, President of DC Asia Advisory and former Deputy Assistant to the Vice President for National Security Affairs
Open letter on erosion of justice in Taiwan
Thursday, Nov 06, 2008, Page 8
The undersigned, scholars and writers from the US, Europe and Australia, wish to express their deep concern about the recent series of detentions in Taiwan of present and former Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government officials. To date there have been at least seven such cases.
It is obvious that there have been cases of corruption in Taiwan, but these have occurred in both political camps. The political neutrality of the judicial system is an essential element in a democracy. It is also essential that any accused are considered innocent until proven guilty in the court of law.
We also believe that the procedures followed by the prosecutor’s offices are severely flawed: while one or two of the accused have been formally charged, the majority is being held incommunicado without being charged. This is a severe contravention of the writ of habeas corpus and a basic violation of due process, justice and the rule of law.
In the meantime, the prosecutor’s offices evidently leak detrimental information to the press. This kind of “trial by press” is a violation of the basic standards of judicial procedures. It also gives the distinct impression that the Kuomintang (KMT) authorities are using the judicial system to get even with members of the former DPP government.
In addition, the people who are being held incommunicado are of course unable to defend themselves against the misreporting and the leaks in the news media.
We do firmly believe that any alleged wrongdoings must be dealt with in a fair and open manner in an impartial court. Justice through the rule of law is essential to Taiwan’s efforts to consolidate democracy and protect fundamental human rights.
We do not want to see Taiwan’s hard-earned democracy jeopardized in this manner. Taiwan can justifiably be proud of its transition to democracy in the late 1980s and early 1990s. It would be sad for Taiwan and detrimental to its international image if the progress which was made during the past 20 years would be erased. Taiwan needs to move forward, not backwards to the unfair and unjust procedures as practiced during the dark days of Martial Law (1947-1987).
Signed:
Julian Baum
Former Far Eastern Economic Review bureau chief
Nat Bellocchi
Former American Institute in Taiwan chairman
Coen Blaauw
Formosan Association for Public Affairs, Washington
David Prager Branner
Director at large (East Asia),
American Oriental Society
Gordon G. Chang
Author of The Coming Collapse of China
PROF. June Teufel Dreyer
University of Miami
PROF. Edward Friedman
University of Wisconsin
PROF. Bruce Jacobs
Monash University
Richard C. Kagan
Professor emeritus,
Hamline University
Jerome Keating
Author and former associate professor, National Taipei University
ASSOC. PROF. Daniel Lynch
School of International Relations, University of Southern California
PROF. Victor H. Mair
University of Pennsylvania
ASSOC. PROF. Donald Rodgers
Austin College
PROF. Terence Russell
University of Manitoba
PROF. Scott Simon
University of Ottawa
John J. Tkacik Jr
Senior research fellow, The Heritage Foundation
Gerrit van der Wees
Editor, Taiwan Communique PROF. Arthur Waldron
University of Pennsylvania
PROF. Vincent Wei-cheng Wang
University of Richmond
Stephen Yates
President of DC Asia Advisory and former deputy assistant to the vice president for national security affairs.
