仇恨花園 － 郝龍斌大安公園造勢晚會

中研院政治科學研究所助理研究員 Nathan Batto，研究台灣選舉已經十幾年，曾經觀察過台灣無數的選舉造勢大會。上個禮拜五，他去大安公園觀察郝龍斌的造勢晚會，並把觀察印象寫在他的部落格 Frozen Garlic 裡。筆者在此大略轉述一下他的觀察。由於他的文章是用英文寫的，我這篇轉述等於是由現場的華語被轉到英文又轉回華文，因此用詞上必然跟現場的華語用詞有所差距，讀者不妨看看意思就好。

Nathan 說，郝龍斌的造勢讓他非常驚訝。他的整體印象是：郝龍斌到底還要不要選？

他以 1976 年美國總統大選，競選連任的福特總統與挑戰者卡特對壘為例。福特總統採取了被稱為『玫瑰花園』的戰術（rose garden strategy），也就是不到處競選，只呆在總統府照顧他的玫瑰花園。

他說，同樣的，郝龍斌『幾乎將所有的時間與能量用在花博的開幕上』，可以稱作『玫瑰戰術』，就像當年要競選連任的福特一樣。

可是，福特當年並沒有當選。事實上，據我所知，福特本人並沒有想當選的意願。

Nathan 接著提到，大安公園附近住有很多外省人（他用的詞是『mainlander』），向來是泛藍的鐵票區。1990 年代新黨發跡的時候，在這裡辦的一系列活動，總是有為數非常眾多，自動自發而且充滿熱情的群眾，那些群眾是他在台灣參與的政治活動中所見過的最激情最投入的參與者。因此，Nathan 對這次的活動也有同樣的期待。

結果卻讓他大失所望。參加人數大概有 2000～2500人，而且看得出來其中可能至少有四分之三是被動員來的，因此不是跟往常一樣是附近居民的主動參與，也沒有以往群眾的熱情。雖然不見得很無聊，但卻對活動本身顯得意興闌珊。

第一個上台演講的是國民黨的立委洪秀柱。令人震驚的是，洪秀柱發表了一篇極端偏激的演講。

她說，2000年我們丟掉政權，非常痛苦。這帶給我們整整八年的仇恨。仇恨！然後我們很高興在 2008年贏回政權，但有些事情還是讓我們很不痛快。這兩年，我們非常不爽，大家都知道為什麼！但在昨天，我們的不爽終於稍微得到一點點疏解。雖然我們之中有很多人還是很不滿，認為處罰應該更重才對。但我想我們可以接受。

洪秀柱從頭到尾都沒有提到『陳水扁』的名字，但讀者應該都知道，『這兩年非常不滿』指的是馬政府沒有把陳水扁定罪，『一點點疏解』指的是陳水扁日前被判 12年，『應該更重才對』指的可能是某些人要把陳水扁處死才甘心（有人曾對陳水扁詛咒『死得很難看』）。

Nathan 接著提到，洪秀柱整個演講重複『恨』字好幾次，好確定大家都有聽到。可以說，整個演講就是一個鼓吹仇恨報復的演講。

這是讓人不解的地方。Nathan 提到一般參政者多會主張和諧：

【很多政治人物喜歡宣揚『愛』的觀念。我雖然到現在還是不知道這個『愛』是指什麼。但我卻非常肯定，沒有任何演講可以像洪秀柱這個演講一樣反愛反到這種程度。她訴求的不是（法律上的）處罰，而是苦毒的折磨。從她的言論你可以想像，如果把案子交到她手上，她很可能會(對陳水扁)施以中古世紀使用的酷刑，譬如說，活生生的剝皮、火燒、打斷骨頭等等，並認為這些酷刑都是正當合宜的。】

Lots of politicians like to talk about “love.” I still don’t have any idea what love means, but I’m pretty sure that this speech was just about as far from love as you can get. She wanted pain, not simple punishment. You got the idea that if it were up to her, she might settle on some medieval torture (flaying the skin, burning flesh, breaking bones, all while the victim is still alive) as an appropriate sentence.

對於國民黨竟敢讓洪秀柱站到台上去傳達這種充滿仇恨的訊息，Nathan 感到異常震驚。

接下來郝龍斌跟馬英九都上台演講。根據 Nathan 的描述，馬英九講得中規中距，還算是像在替郝龍斌助選。但郝龍斌自己的演講則是亂七八糟，完全不成樣子。他的演講技巧奇差無比，根本不知道什麼時候該提高聲調來強調重點。

但是最大的問題在於：他的競選內容似乎主要是在抱怨說自己沒有受到肯定。他重複強調自己有在做事，但除了花博之外卻說不出到底做了什麼，因此對聽眾來說，聽起來好像他實際上沒有做什麼，只想用空洞的喊叫來掩飾說不出口的政績。

而且他的邏輯實在很糟糕。有一次提到民進黨蘇貞昌陣營攻擊花博。這次他倒是提供了實際例子 － 說他把錢浪費在某些蔬菜上。他對這些“浪費金錢”的指控提出這樣的理由來反駁：蘇貞昌陣營忘了，花博不是他的或台北市的花博，而是所有台灣人的花博！

所以這樣就可以名正言順地漫天開價，亂花人民的血汗錢了？

這就是國民黨台北市市長郝龍斌的邏輯。

此外，他過度吹捧了花博的身價，而對真正與民生習習相關的問題卻避而不談。高漲的房價、坑洞的路面、混亂的交通等等，這些人民的切身之痛，會因為一個花博而減輕絲毫嗎？更別說，這個花博是在極度浪費人民血汗錢，而且充滿貪腐弊案的情況下辦出來的。郝龍斌試圖用這樣一個浮華不實的花園來麻痺人民的痛苦，到底能夠感動多少人呢？

其他的細節我就不再多談。台灣這十幾年的民主之路走來艱辛，民眾在藍綠對抗中搖擺顛頗，早已經厭倦了極端的社會對立。而以往常被國民黨貼上對立標籤的民進黨，早已經在新的領導階層帶領下，經過嚴肅的內部辯論與反省，漸漸地走出對抗的陰影，開始以和諧合作來號召民眾。

相反的，喜歡指責對手製造對立的國民黨高層，已經執政兩年半了，卻只會緊緊咬住前總統陳水扁的影子不放，每逢選舉一到就操作扁案來對支持者灌輸仇恨的種子。自己黨內貪污腐敗治國無能，但舉一國之力來散播仇恨製造對立，卻是很在行。這種『以暴戾之氣治國，以仇恨報復競選』的方式，看在當初寄望國民黨能帶來和諧社會而投票支持他們的選民眼裡，不知道會不會因為自己反而成為社會暴戾之氣的幫手而感到極端的諷刺？


Update.1: 雖然此文內容絕大部分根據 Nathan 的文章，但並非該文的“翻譯”。照翻的地方有用引號標出來。 Nathan 在他的部落格說明他嚴守中立，不會替任何政黨宣傳的立場。如果讀者看了我這篇文章而有那樣的感覺，那是筆者的責任，不是 Nathan 的。Nathan 的部落格累積了相當多有關台灣選舉的客觀分析，建議讀者多多參考。

Update.2: 第二天同一地點，蘇貞昌辦了一個 OPEN TAIPEI 城市夢想音樂會，傳達的訊息是愛，和諧，與夢想。

目無法紀的蔡守訓與台北地院用違法盜錄的看守所對話延長對扁的羈押

(Note: English version of this article with similar content: here )

台北地方法院昨天下令第三次延長已經被非法羈押了 227 天的前總統陳水扁的羈押，時間由 7 月 26 日開始到 9 月25日共兩個月。(北院認定 干擾審判 扁三度延押)

我必須提醒台灣民眾，這個判決顯示了審理扁案的當庭法官蔡守訓及台北地院和議庭是如何地目無法紀。

這個延長羈押判決的主要理由，是台北地院認定陳前總統在看守所接見他的幕僚時指使他的幕僚向看守所外的人士求助：

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。

台北地院和議庭引用看守所所錄到的陳水扁跟他幕僚的對話內容，指控陳前總統透過幕僚「借助民進黨主席蔡英文施壓、利用連署等方式干擾審判」，並以之為延長羈押陳前總統的主要理由。

好，「引用看守所所錄到的陳水扁跟他幕僚的對話內容」，請讀者深吸一口氣，然後再往下讀。。。

在今年一月底，大法官已經對「對看守所羈押人犯會客進行錄音」認定為違憲 (大法官：對羈押禁見被告律見時錄音違憲)：

司法院大法官會議今天做出釋字第654號解釋，認為羈押法中，看守所對羈押禁見被告與律師律見時全程錄音的規定違憲，應自5月1日起失去效力，錄音所獲資訊也將沒有證據能力。

今年 4 月 16日，立法院初審通過羈押法部分條文修正草案 （台立院初審 被告會見律師不得錄音錄影）：

立法院司法及法制委員會今天初審通過羈押法部分條文修正草案，律師接見被告時，看守所擬不得錄影、錄音；修正條文也規定看守所得檢查被告與辯護人往來文書及相關資料。

4月28日立法院三讀通過 (台羈押法三讀 看守所不得錄影錄音)：

台灣立法院28日通過「羈押法」部份修正條文，為了保障羈押被告的訴訟權，未來看守所不能錄影或錄音被告與其律師的會見情況，至於過去被告在看守所的言語、發行書信等內容可做為偵查、審判時參考的規定也一併刪除。

也就是說，看守所會客錄音，不但被大法官認定為違憲而且立法院已經立法通過禁止，是一個徹底違法的行為。

很明顯地，蔡守訓法官跟台北地方法院完全將司法踩在角底下 ── 不但違法的錄音行為沒有中斷，而且竟然還膽敢將這些違法的錄音拿來做為迫害陳前總統的根據。

由這件事可知，蔡守訓這班無法無天的亂臣賊子再一次地將政治意圖凌駕憲法之上，更加證實了針對陳前總統的司法官司是一場有計謀的政治迫害。對這些披著法官的外衣、實則甘為執行馬政權政治迫害的「馬前足」來說，法律不過是他們用來鬥爭政敵的工具；他們把自己放在司法之上，不必遵循任何什麼法律規範，甚至連憲法也不在他們眼中。

看到這些，台灣人要多祈禱，祈禱自己還有所愛的家人朋友，這一輩子千萬不要落入這些人手中。



補充:

南方論壇一位網友 vedo 在討論欄（目無法紀的蔡守訓與台北地院）中認為延押裁決並不違法：

1. 自今年5月1日起，羈押中的被告與律師見面時，監所將不得再予錄音、監聽，僅可以派員觀看，看不能聽聞，即「監看不與聞」；但大法官會議並未禁止對被告與親友見面時錄音。

2. 針對"對受羈押被告與辯護人接見時監聽、錄音所獲得之資訊，得以作為偵查或審判上認定被告本案犯罪事實之證據..." 在此範圍內係已解釋為妨害被告防禦權之行使，且牴觸憲法保障訴訟權之規定。但法院之延押庭所作出的是延押"裁定書"，既非和檢察官之偵查有關，也不是法官對犯罪事實之認定而於審判上所作出的"審判書"。

陳水扁跟他幕僚的對話內容既非羈押被告與律師、辯護人之律見談話內容，自無辯護人協助被告所行使的防禦權受侵害之問題，而羈押被告與親友見面時的錄音，也不在釋字第654號的解釋保障範圍內。

北院原本最初對陳水扁是作出羈押禁見之裁定，即陳水扁僅能律見，但到第二次羈押時，是羈押但不禁見，陳水扁因而忽略看守所仍可對羈押被告與親友見面時進行監聽、錄音的事情。而昨日法官再根據此錄音內容認為陳水扁有逃亡、串供及其他干擾審判進行之認定，而作出延押的裁定，本就無違憲的問題。

vedo 網友指出大法官釋字第654號並無限制羈押單位針對被羈押人與其親友會面之對話進行錄音。

這點屬實。但該釋號也有提到原羈押法第二十八條為違法，而該條文已經由立法院三讀通過予以刪除。該條文內容在現在的羈押法已經看不到，但其內容可以找得到：

被告在所之言語、行狀、發受書信之內容可供偵查或審判上之參考者，應呈報檢察官或法院。

羈押法的官方英文網頁更新比較慢，現在還可以看到第二十八條：

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.

這一條被刪除，表示該條文的規定有偏差，而該條文所指的並沒有侷限在「被羈押人與律師」的對話，而是被羈押人在看守所的所有書信與言行。

因此，以「與被羈押人對話者並非律師」為由來合理化「錄音」並以之做為不利於被羈押人的裁決，是對該法條的扭曲。

至於 vedo 提到的第二點，個人認為「錄音違憲」的判決與立法院修改羈押法之精神，在於制止檢方利用公權力阻止、妨礙被羈押人為自己辯護的權力與機會。釋憲與修法兩者都沒有規定這樣的精神只限於「審判」，而「羈押」本身的原因之一當然是為了檢方「利於偵查」，要不然何必羈押。

如果再仔細地思考被認為違憲而刪除的第二十八條，可以知道，不止被羈押人與任何訪客的對話不能被錄音或拿來做為對被羈押人不利的證詞，連被羈押人在看守所中的任何言論、行為、書寫，都受到法律保障而不能拿來做為不利於被羈押人的工具。

基於上述理由，個人認為 vedo 的解釋有缺陷，蔡守訓法官與台北地方法院的行為確為違法。

Seeing Chen Shui-bian's so-called "money laundering" case from another angle

by Taiwan Echo and Tim Maddog

When the overseas deposits of former Taiwan president Chen Shui-bian's (陳水扁, AKA "A-bian") family -- said to be as high as 300 million US dollars -- were exposed couple of months ago, my instincts told me, A-bian will "die a horrible death" (to borrow Ma Ying-jeou's words). Forget about the insane hatred that pro-blue supporters have for A-bian. Simply because of the huge sum of the money, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) will definitely crush him.

Below is how I see their "blue" print:

Chen Shui-bian claims that the money -- handled by his wife without his knowledge -- consists of leftover donations which came from his supporters during his election campaigns. If so, then the money would belong either to Chen himself or to the DPP -- the party that nominated Chen as a candidate. Whichever one of these it is, it's certain that the money belongs neither to the government nor to the Taiwanese public. And it certainly doesn't belong to the KMT.

But the KMT will most probably do everything it can to make that money their own. The only way they can do so -- in spite of the evidence -- is to use the judiciary tools that they control to fabricate the witnesses and evidence in order to pin the crime of corruption on A-bian. Only by adopting this approach can the KMT claim that the money should be "legally returned" to their hands (the current government, that is).

If we closely watch the investigation of A-bian's alleged "money laundering" over the past couple of months, here's what we see:

1. First, use politicians and pro-blue media to brainwash people into believing "A-bian is corrupt." No evidence is required. In fact the KMT has been applying the same tricks for years to conduct "trials by press" against pro-Taiwan people, so this is really nothing new.

2. Secondly, interrogate, detain, and/or arrest anybody you can -- whether connected to the case or not -- entice, threaten, or coerce them into becoming witnesses for the state by using approaches like, "If you testify that Chen Shui-bian took the money, we won't put you in jail."

Do you think this is unlikely? There are reports/video evidence that Taiwan police have threatened civilians with jail time: "If you don't shut up, I will put you in jail." When Chen Yunlin came to Taiwan, some Tibetans were threatened by the police, being told, "If you dare to go to the airport, you will be jailed for the rest of your life." (警威脅敢抗議 關你一輩子 (Protesters threatened by the police with life in jail))

So again, threats are a common tactic used by Taiwan's police.

3. To save their own asses, the people who have been threatened (for example, poor Yeh Sheng-mao, the former Chief of Investigation Bureau) eventually come up with some so-called evidence, maintaining the false illusion that the uncivilized KMT will somehow keep their promises to set them free.

4. After the fabricated evidence is collected and well-staged, the KMT takes those witnesses (who are no longer valuable to them), turns them into defendants, and gives them heavy sentences (look what happened to poor Yeh Sheng-mao!).

5. Even without any guilt or even a bit of evidence, they put Chen Shui-bian in jail for sure.

As the KMT continues this conspiracy, we will continue to see "witnesses becoming defendants after their statements are taken."

As a result, the KMT will claim that the large amount of foreign deposits owned by Chen Shui-bian's family actually "belongs to the government" -- the KMT-run government, that is.

Poor Yeh Sheng-mao

Earlier, when former Investigative Bureau chief Yeh Sheng-mao held a press conference to announce his decision to follow the attorney office's instructions to incriminate Chen Shui-bian, "The wife of my ex-boss persuaded me to follow the right path and be loyal to the country," I immediately thought: This time, he will be done for.

When you hear these kinds of "keywords" from Chinese culture -- like "persuading someone to follow the right path", "loyal to the country", etc. -- coming from the police or the judiciary system, you know that the moment of catastrophe is at your doorstep.

As I expected, even after Yeh Sheng-mao made statements that were unfavorable towards A-bian, he was still indicted and punished with a heavy sentence.

2008-9-25 ：「北檢再傳葉盛茂 擬追訴涉洩密罪」
Taipei District Prosecutors' Office arraigns Yeh Sheng-mao again, intends to prosecute him for leaking secrets
http://www.libertytimes.com.tw/2008/new/sep/25/today-p7.htm

2008-10-4 ：「追訴兩起洩密罪 葉盛茂被求重刑」
Prosecutors up the indictment on Yeh Sheng-mao and seak for heavy sentence
http://www.libertytimes.com.tw/2008/new/oct/4/today-p3.htm

2008-12-5 ：「在葉盛茂重判10年 當庭癱軟」
Sentenced to 10 years in jail, Yeh Sheng-mao collapses in court
http://www.libertytimes.com.tw/2008/new/dec/5/today-p6.htm

In the last report cited,

"The judge describes in the official indictment document that, the fund of Chen's oversea deposit ***might*** contain some money from the state affairs fund." (highlight is mine)

"Might" contain some money from the state affairs fund? The court made its judgment based not on evidence but on this kind of guesses?!

The only reason I can come up with is that the KMT in fact couldn't find any evidence, but instead had to resort to the claim that "some of the money in Chen's overseas accounts **might** belong to the government," otherwise they will have no way to get their hands on the money.

There's another case where witnesses became defendants after their statements were taken:
2008-12-6 ： 「蔡美利、陳俊英 證人改被告」
Tsai Mei-li and Chen Chun-ying, originally witnesses, become defendants
http://www.libertytimes.com.tw/2008/new/dec/6/today-p6-2.htm

Will Chen Chih-chung give his money to the KMT?

According to a report by Liberty Times, Chen Chih-chung, son of Chen Shui-bian, agreed to transfer those overseas money to the attorney's office
2008-11-27：「陳致中同意匯回7億 珍未反對」
http://www.libertytimes.com.tw/2008/new/nov/27/today-fo1.htm

Pay attention to the words below:

『檢方表示，陳致中夫婦同意匯款，可視為犯後態度的考量之一，至於是否在起訴書中建請法院從輕量刑或予緩刑，由於還沒偵結，言之過早。林志豪說，陳致中夫婦是在檢方要求建議下，口頭表示同意匯回款項』

"The attorney office says that the fact that Chen Shui-bian's son Chen Chih-chung (陳致中) and daughter-in-law Huang Jui-ching (黃睿靚) have agreed to turn in the money could be considered as a reason for leniency. But it's too early to suggest a reduced sentence to the court because the investigation is still underway. Lin Chih-hao (林志豪) said Chen Chih-chung and Huang had made a verbal agreement to turn in the money (Echo note: remitted to a bank account created by the attorney office), following a suggestion of the attorney's office."

What is so shocking is that the attorney's office bluntly claims that "whether the money is turned in or not" will be considered a factor in determining a sentence.

Before the attorney's office has even provided evidence proving that this is government's money -- which they haven't been able to do so even after months of investigations using the manpower of almost the entire judiciary system in Taiwan-- the money still legally belongs to Chen's family.

Why on earth should Chen Chih-chung and Huang give their legally-owned money to the KMT government in order to have a lighter sentence considered in a case where the defendant has not yet been judged "guillty" by the court?

Isn't that blatant extortion by the attorney's office?

According to what has been reported so far, Chen Chih-chung and Huang have agreed verbally to that suggestion. I believe, if Chen really transfers that money to the KMT, or even if the Chen family "donates" all their wealth they have earned after generations, in the end they will still be given heavy sentences.

If someone is too naive to recognize the brutal nature of the KMT -- if that person fantasizes that as long as they open their hearts (and pocketbooks) to the KMT, then the KMT will keep their promises -- then that person will eventually lose everything.

We can forget about whether "this money should be returned to Chen's supporters." If Chen Chih-chung is smart enough, he should keep that money, so that in the difficult days to come he might have the chance to buy his way out. But as soon as he turns in the money, he loses any leverage with which to negotiate and brings himself and his family to a very tragic end.

Dazed and confused Taiwanese

According to what is revealed about Taiwan history, it has been a common approach for the KMT to coerce someone into making a false accusation (for example, claiming that some innocent person is a communist bandit), then kill him after the statement is taken.

Certainly, we won't see someone getting killed over that nowadays. The KMT's approach is far more delicate in this informative era. However, the conspiracy tactic still works the same way and is enough to get Chen family lose everything. Seeing that same old drama revealed right in front of our eyes, it sends a chill up my spine.

But how do the DPP, pro-green supporters, pro-Taiwan scholars, and pro-Taiwan bloggers see this huge amount of money? This really bothers me.

It's been months since Chen's overseas accounts were exposed. But I don't see any concern regarding whether this is the money that DPP supporters donated to Chen. If it is to be returned, the recipient should be the DPP. It should never be "returned" to a KMT government.

For the DPP and for everyone fighting against pro-China authoritarianism, limited resources are always a problem. The source of financial support is even more crucial when what they are fighting is an organ that owns all the state power of a country and that dominates the public opinion with biased pro-state media at the same time.

It's therefore a puzzle for me that I see only the KMT government is launching almost the power of entire country to take that money into their pocket, but none of pro-green supporters has made any effort to get it back.

Is it because that pro-green has never thought about this? Or to them the money is dirty so they feel despicable to get their hands on it?

I don't get it.