(註：中文版請看這裡)
Taipei District Court issues an order to extend the former president Chen Shui-bian's (陳水扁) detention the 3rd time, beginning from 7/26 to 9/25, adding 2 more months on top of the already lengthy detention of 227 days. (北院認定 干擾審判 扁三度延押)
I want to highlight one of the brazen law encroachments made by the collegiate bench and the presiding Judge Tsai Shou-hsun (蔡守訓）.
The main reason for this detention extension is that they argue Chen instructs his staff to communicate with people outside to help him:
合議庭先從台北看守所接見會面的錄音譯文，認定扁雖被羈押，仍不時透過會面接見，指導劉導等相關幕僚透過外力，明示應聯合其他個人或團體聲援。
The collegiate bench uses the transcript of the recorded conversations (between Chen and his staff when Chen's staff visited him in the detention center) to argue that, although Chen is detained, he continuously meets and instructs his staff Liu Dao (spelling?) to use outsiders to help him.
The collegiate bench cited the conversations as evidence that Chen is asking outsiders to help him, which is considered - by Tsai and the collegiate bench in Taipei District Court - 'interfering with the justice' and thus the main reason for the extended detention.
Now, take a deep deep deep breath ---
The recording of detainees' meeting with their guests is declared illegal (i.e., it is against the Constitution) by the Grand Justices in January this year, and an order is issued to stop the recording after May 1st !
It is obvious that Judge Tsai and his collegiate bench completely ignore the order -- not only the recording continues, but also the content of illegal taping is used against Chen now !!!
Tsai and Taipei District Court have once again put their agenda above the Constitution and prove that the prosecution of Chen is political oriented and no boundary -- even the Constitution -- will be followed.
Update, seriously:
I took down this post for a couple of hours, because one netter vedo has counter arguments against my points (here, in Chinese though), and I want to make sure I get it right. To be short, vedo argues that although the decision of the Grand Justices ( 大法官釋字第654號 ) says that recording the detainee's meeting with defense lawyers is illegal, the decision doesn't forbid the recording between detainees and any one other than the defense lawyer. Thus recording of conversation between Chen and his staff is legal.
He missed the point that in the decision, the Grand Justices says that the Art.28 of the (original) Detention Act is illegal. The Detention Act was later revised on April, 28th to delete that article. The content of deleted Art. 28:
If the content of the speeches, conducts, and sent and received mails of a defendant can provide information for criminal investigation and trial, they shall be reported to public prosecutor or district court.
That is, what is deemed illegal doesn't limit to the conversations between the detainee and the defense lawyer.
That is, not only the conversations a detainee has during a meeting with any guests are protected, but also, anything the detainee says and writes in the detention center (not in a meeting) is under protection of the law and shouldn't be used against him/her.
0 comments:
Post a Comment