Showing posts with label judiciary injustice. Show all posts
Showing posts with label judiciary injustice. Show all posts

2009/09/24

Pan Green's Mentality Behind the CSB Case -- And a Replay in Kaoshiung

The CSB's case - either what he did or didn't do, or the way the Taipei judiciary system fixed the case - has been haunting Taiwan in the past whole year. People with justice in mind couldn't stop asking why it could be possible, or wondering how the KMT could pull out the conspiracy so successfully to persecute the officials (and their families) of previous government in such a blatant way (see J. Michael Cole's Mobilize Now!).

From my understanding, one of the answers - a very critical one - lies in nowhere else but the green camp itself.

We Taiwanese haven't quite get to know how to be masters of own fates yet. Most still think like servants in the old time, that we go to the voting booth to "pick the Savior." Hoping that the Savior alone can right every wrong for us, we all go back home to wait for out dream to come true, without paying much attention to watch if the Savior does follow the promises he made.

Or even some do pay attention, they keep silent because they insist on "solidifying the leadership," based on the belief that not criticizing the Savior is the only means for the Savior to lead us to the promised land (I pointed this out in a post (in Chinese) when discussing the case of DPP's controversial pick of Tainan County candidate back in April, 台灣派的枷鎖:鞏固領導中心).

So, in contrary to the continuous attacks coming from the blue camp on very single policy our the Savior made, we keep very low profile, making it look like that we can take it whichever way it goes. As a result, the leader will only see and feel mounting pressure from the blue camp.

It won't be hard to picture what a person in the position of the Savior will do under that situation.

It thus drifts, step by step, farther away from our dream, until one day the situation is rotten to a point of no return.

Even at that point, we fail to recognize that the failure is the result of aggressive attacks from the blue camp, of our silence in response to those attacks, and of our ignorance thinking that the fate of a country relies solely on the shoulders of a single the Savior.

One man rises, the country is saved; one man goes down, we are all dead. So we all rush out to blame the Savior for all the fall. We claim that the so-called Saviorlied to us, that the Savior is not a savior at all. We forget that when one goes to the public announcing that he was lied to, he is announcing that something goes wrong in his intelligence.

As such, by laying all blames upon the falling guy, we wipe out the guilt of choosing a wrong leader (which in wrong), and free ourselves from the responsibility of letting the situation go worse and worse without intervening with the mind of masters.

This is probably the primary mentality of all those "anti-Bian" hatrid in the green camp -- coming from people ranging from general populate to highly educated elites, including some pronounced scholars and professors, domestic or overseas.

Very very few Taiwanese realize that, when things go wrong in a democracy, people -- the masters -- are those who are responsible. Because Taiwanese are unwilling or unaware of the need to play the role of a responsible master, that we have no courage to carry the burden, upon failure we blame everyone -- the non-green voters, the KMT, and their own falling leader -- but ourselves. That mentality is the key reason KMT is able to play the CSB card so well --- they must have known that if they pull CSB's legs to an extent, the green camp will follow up with much harsher attack against our own leader all by ourselves. In that sense, I would argue that we somehow conspire with KMT to allow the judiciary operation to go down so quickly.

Wandering around forums/blogs of both Chinese and English, I witness how much effort the English circle put on the judiciary injustice on CSB's case in the past year -- analysis, criticisms, open letters, endorsements ... one after one. In contrary, the attention of green camp on CSB's human right is almost none -- most major players or elites were dwelling in the anger of "we are cheated; we are hurt; it's all his fault." The attention from the green camp to care about the justice in CSB's case didn't show up until early May this year, when DPP politicians suddenly woke up and went to visit CSB in jail one by one during the week before DPP's 517 protest. It is at least 6 month of total negligence on the judiciary unfairness that will definitely hurt all Taiwanese in the future. Even after then, the hatred and anger keep coming from the green elites (hey, I just got one email of this sort today). It is so intense that it looks like wiping out CSB from our memories is the only thing pan green cares in the world, and as long as we do this but nothing else, we will reach our wonderland automatically.

The unbelievable ignorance toward the immediate danger right in front of us, and the shocking contrast between the Taiwanese and English circles lead me to a painful realization that the real source of major failure of green camp is most probably embedded deep in the green camp itself, not in the blue camp. Without fixing those internal problems, pan green will not gain any advantage even Ma government and the KMT fare much worse then what have done now.

But how? I am not quite sure, yet.

Taiwanese retested in Kaoshiung

But, the way Kaoshiung City handles Uighur leader Rebiya Kadeer's documentary "The 10 Conditions of Love" in the Kaoshiung Film Festival is a "CSB government in a smaller scale" that provides us a real chance to relive what happened before, as well as to rehearse what is to come in the future. (See Kaoshiung Folds under China's Pressure to Kick Rebiya's Film out of the Festival)

Every single administration head has to face public opinions, and act accordingly. There's no doubt that pro-China power will be very aggressive to give pressure to stop the screening of Kadeer's movie. If we don't play the role of asking what should have been done with at least the same caliber of pressure the pro-china voices asking Chen Chu (陳菊, Mayor of Kaoshiung City, who approves the decision to exclude the screening of the film from the Festival) to stop filming it, then Chen Chu will only face one-sided pressure from the pro-China camp. She will have no choice but follow what "the louder voices" wants. The compromising on the free speech issue will encroach further step by step, as what happened during CSB's era.

Some argue that although it's not an ideal solution by rescheduling the film to a date 3 weeks ahead of the Festival, we won a little by filming it anyway. To me that argument makes absolutely no sense.

If the case happens in a blue district, we could argue that because the administrative power is in blue's hand, we expect that Kadeer's film be prohibited, so we will "win a little" if we get it screened, even it's not screened during the Festival.

But this is in a green district !!! Screening Kadeer's film DURING the Festival is the rightful state we should have been in. Any other approach is a "loss", thus can only be a question of "losing small" or "losing big." It will never be a "win."

Mistaking a "small loss" as a "small win," simply because what the blue camp wants is a "big loss" from us. This sort of forgetting where we should be has been happening again and again in the past.

That's why I emphasize that it is a "fold" to pro-China's power. We all understand that Chen Chu is taking huge pressure from pro-China camp. But, we will go toward very different directions by choosing from the following two choices: trying to explain away the losing move as a winning one, or trying to build up the pressure from the green side to balance the pressure and help Chen Chu make a real winning move.

2009/07/11

Brief summary of political persecution against Chen Shui-bian


The linked article below (in Chinese) briefly summarizes the judiciary injustice against CSB.

扁案為什麼會政治化?-----從扁媽為子哭冤說起

The judiciary injustice against CSB has been repeatedly raised in English blogs and by international scholars since the end of last year.

But in Taiwan, even pan green paid little or no attention at all to it, not to mention blue supporters. Even when the DPP chairwoman Tsai decides to make launch to fight for CSB's human right lately, her appeal mentions only the extended detention with a term of "judiciary injustice".

Without laying out the "sign of persecution in almost every single step" in CSB's case, the focus on the extended detention could easily be mistaken or distorted into an attempt to interfere the law practice.

It is therefore critical for articles like the linked one being circulated more often and more widely.

2009/01/16

Ma Ying-jeou Gov's Support on Prosecutors' Skit Reveals Discrimination Issue


A follow-up regarding the mocking skit put up by Taipei District Prosecutors Office (TDPO 台北地檢署).

The unbelievable misconduct - mocking a defendant of their ongoing investigation in a skit - arranged by the Chief Prosecutor of TDPO (see previous post for description and video; Taipei Times' here), has angered many and quickly makes its own way to the attention of international media.


Wang Ching-feng (王清峰),
Minister of Justice. Source:
Ministry of Justice, Taiwan
In response to critics, Ma Ying-jeou's Minister of Justice Just-Us (term borrowing from Tim Maddog) Wang Ching-feng (王清峰), who was among the audience to enjoy and applaud the prosecutors' mocking skit, admitted that the show is indeed mocking Chen (reported by Max Hirsch of Japan's Kyodo News, mentioned in Michael's blog), but said, "it was just a play to help everybody relax" and "the skit should not be taken seriously, because it reflected widespread sentiment on this island of 23 million people." (see AP's report, and a must-read editorial titled "Taiwan needs no trials by skit" on Taiwan News)

So, Wang, who is chosen by Ma to be the judicial administrator of Ma's government, thinks that it's nothing wrong to humiliate a defendant of an ongoing investigation in public, by those prosecutors from the same office investigating him ?

The skit itself is shocking by two key issues: one, it's the prosecutors mocking the defendant currently under their investigations, and two, entire fleet of top law professionals in Taiwan sit there watching and laughing. Not a single one came out to condemn it.

It's unbelievable all by itself. But Wang's response sent an even more chilling wave than the event itself.

In just several months after Ma's inauguration on May, 20th, 2008, the quick deterioration of human right in Taiwan has invited grave concerns from scholars overseas and international NGO human right watch groups. One of the concerns is the questionable procedures on prosecutions focusing solely on DPP members.

Being extremely protective on his image, Ma Ying-jeou has launched a lot of manpower trying to explain away those international accusations by denying.

Ma's government said that they didn't do it; the entire world is all wrong about them.

Denial of facts certainly didn't clear Ma and his administration from the crime of suppressing human right. But, at least, they knew that it's wrong, and they knew that if they admit it, they would be on the wrong side.

The response from Wang to the critics about the skit throw a totally different ball to the game.

This time, she didn't deny the fact and their intention to make fun out of a current defendant, an act that is clearly violating the basic principle of law practicing. But she insists that it's justifiable to do so.

From "knowing right or wrong but denying" to "don't even know what's right or wrong," on something that doesn't need a law degree to know, and demonstrated by Ma Ying-jeou's justice administrator who should have known better than anyone else --- there's gotta be something far more serious than it looks in this administration.

Do Wang and Taipei prosecutors seriously think that it's ok for prosecutors to humiliate in public ANY defendant of their ongoing investigations ?

If yes, then they all should be banned from practicing the law.

If the answer is no --- that they don't think it's acceptable as a general rule, except when it is applied to Chen. What possibly indication could that be? That they believe from deep down of their minds that Chen Shui-bian is a sub-humanbeing, therefore the law they learned in school and practiced professionally the whole life doesn't need to apply to Chen ?

How is Ma Ying-jeou gonna "explain away" this vivid display of discrimination under his administration?

And how is Ma Ying-jeou able to convince people that those cases against other DPP members are not tainted by this mindset of discrimination?

Note: the extent of mis-appointments by Ma Ying-jeou on several incompetent cabinet heads show poor judgment of Ma Ying-jeou. Wang Ching-feng is just one of those cases.