Chen must stay behind bars: Taipei District Court
　

By Shelley Huang
STAFF REPORTER
Wednesday, Mar 04, 2009, Page 1
　

Former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), who has been detained since Dec. 30 ahead of his trial on money-laundering and corruption charges, will be held for another two months after March 26, the Taipei District Court ruled yesterday. The court also set a start date of March 17 for the trial.

Citing fears that Chen might collude with witnesses or try to abscond, the court extended his detention.

An aide at Chen’s office, who wished to remain anonymous, yesterday said the former president would appeal.

“Could it be that [the court] intends to keep Chen Shui-bian [at the Taipei Detention Center] until the first ruling is handed down?” the aide asked.

Presiding Judge Tsai Shou-shun (蔡守訓) said the trial would begin on March 17 and called the former president’s bookkeeper Chen Chen-hui (陳鎮慧) as the first witness.

Meanwhile, former first lady Wu Shu-jen (吳淑珍) appeared at a pre-trial hearing yesterday. The hearing was held to clarify witness statements and evidence and to schedule court dates with the defendants and prosecutors in her trial.

Wu’s lawyer Lin Chih-chung (林志忠) asked that the court arrange a meeting with Wu, Chen Chen-hui, former Presidential Office deputy secretary-general Ma Yung-cheng (馬永成), former Chen Shui-bian office director Lin Teh-hsun (林德訓), and former Chinatrust Financial Holding Co vice chairman Jeffrey Koo Jr (辜仲諒).

Tsai asked if Wu’s lawyers had enough time to examine the evidence in the money-laundering case, to which Lin suggested that tomorrow’s scheduled hearing be canceled because there was too much information to review.

Tsai agreed and announced that the next hearing would take place on March 12.

He also scheduled Ma and Lin Teh-hsun to testify in court on March 19; former director-general of the Presidential Office accounting department Fon Shui-lin (馮瑞麟) and accountant Chiu Chiung-hsien (邱瓊賢) to testify on March 31; accountants Lan Mei-ling (蘭梅玲) and Liang En-tzu (梁恩賜) on April 2; Koo on April 7; and former vice premier Yeh Chu-lan (葉菊蘭) and former premier Chang Chun-hsiung (張俊雄) on April 9.

In related news, the Special Investigation Panel (SIP) said yesterday that the former first family’s physician Huang Fang-yen (黃芳彥) had been listed as a defendant in the money-laundering case.

“Dr. Huang Fang-yen is suspected of violating the Money Laundering Control Act [洗錢防制法],” SIP spokesman Chen Yun-nan (陳雲南) said.

Meanwhile, Koo boarded a plane to China yesterday morning. The purpose of his trip was not made public, but the SIP had been informed of his travel plans.

Premier denies ‘political’ bias in ECFA plan
　

By Flora Wang AND Ko Shu-ling
STAFF REPORTERS
Wednesday, Mar 04, 2009, Page 1

Premier Liu Chao-shiuan (劉兆玄) promised not to sign an “economic cooperation framework agreement” (ECFA) with China under a “political” framework yesterday amid opposition lawmakers’ concerns that the nation would not have equal footing with China.

During a question-and-answer session with Democratic Progressive Party legislators Chiu Yi-ying (邱議瑩) and Cheng Ting-fei (陳亭妃), Liu said he did not agree that signing an ECFA would be a move toward unification.

“It would be impossible [for the government to do that],” he said.

The government’s plan to sign an agreement has sparked widespread concern. President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) said last week that the government would push for the implementation of an agreement, but would seek public opinion on the agreement’s title, content and form. The government had been describing the proposed pact as a cross-strait comprehensive economic cooperation agreement (CECA), but on Friday Ma sought to quell the uproar by relabeling it an “economic cooperation framework agreement.”

But Ma’s move was criticized by Chen and Chiu, who said it proved the government had no idea of the impact of such an agreement.

Liu responded by saying: “Focusing on the English name of the agreement is meaningless ... its English name is not the point … Generally speaking, it is a more comprehensive agreement on the framework of cross-strait economic [cooperation].”

Liu said the government was expected to negotiate on products, services, copyright dispute resolution mechanisms and related matters with Beijing during talks on a pact. However, he refused to provide details of the proposed deal.

“How are we going to negotiate it if we reveal the content now?” he said.

Earlier in the day, Mainland Affairs Council Chairwoman Lai Shin-yuan (賴幸媛) dismissed media speculation that an ECFA would symbolize a “one China” market.

“[The government wishes] to sign cross-strait economic cooperation agreements in a bid to normalize economic and trade relations and prevent Taiwan from being marginalized,” she said. “It is a pragmatic economic measure and agreement. It is not political at all. It has nothing to do with a ‘one China’ market.”

The Presidential Office also dismissed complaints that it would be impossible to bar some Chinese products in negotiating an economic agreement with China.

“It is a common practice to establish a ‘safeguard mechanism’ when two countries discuss a free-trade agreement,” Presidential Office Spokesman Wang Yu-chi (王郁琦) said in response to questions on whether Ma could make good on his promise to bar some Chinese products or industries.

Since the content of the ECFA had not been finalized, various issues could be discussed at the negotiating table including tariffs and protecting investments and intellectual property rights, he said.

Wang said a “safeguard mechanism” was what Ma promised during last year’s campaign. There were many precedents for countries limiting certain products, citing South Korea and Japan as examples.

Chen’s office defends astonishing claims
　

REVELATIONS: The former president’s office said the allegations were to highlight his right to a fair trial and what he considers the prosecutors’ questionable professionalism

By Ko Shu-ling
STAFF REPORTER
Wednesday, Mar 04, 2009, Page 3

The office of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) yesterday defended his recent astonishing revelations at court hearings, saying that Chen’s remarks were meant to question the suitability of prosecutors and draw the court’s attention to his right to a fair trial.

During a court hearing last week, Chen said that the Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU) was suspected of accepting money from the Chinese Communist Party and that there was a DVD suggesting President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) had intimate relations with a former ICRT DJ.

Chen also said that a Special Investigation Panel (SIP) prosecutor had asked Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Chairperson Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) to convey a message to him when he was still the president that a presidential pardon should be granted to then Taipei mayor Ma Ying-jeou’s former secretary Yu Wen (余文), who had been found guilty of using receipts from other sources to falsely report expenditures from Ma’s “special allowance fund.”

Chen’s office issued a statement yesterday saying that the matter concerning the TSU was revealed to Chen by SIP prosecutor Chu Chao-liang (朱朝亮) when Chu conducted a raid at Chen’s Paolai apartment on Aug. 16 last year.

As for the matter concerning Yu, the statement said it was later confirmed by Tsai that SIP prosecutor Yueh Fang-ju (越方如) had asked Tsai to convey such a wish to Chen.

As for the alleged DVD, the statement said it was well known that “somebody was peddling a certain DVD to both the blue and green camps during the 2008 presidential election.”

The statement said that SIP prosecutor Wu Wen-chung (吳文忠) had apparently played an important role during the process by suppressing the DVD during the election.

The statement accused Chu, Yueh and Wu of being “aggressively involved in politics, political parties and election affairs” and said Chen strongly questioned whether they were able to handle his case. The statement also criticized the way SIP prosecutors obtained so-called confessions from other witnesses in Chen’s case, saying that they suspected some prosecutors might have used “improper means.”

It said Chen never took the initiative to mention or confirm that he had financially supported his party’s members because he realized the sensitivity of political donations. Despite the Political Contribution Act (政治獻金法), there were many gray areas when it came to practice, it said.

“However, [Chen] cannot accept the accusation that the funds he raised from businesses were extortion, bribes or kickbacks,” it said. “This was unfair and overt political persecution.”

The statement said during Chen’s eight-year presidency, he donated more than NT$1 billion (US$28.5 million) to his party and candidates from his party as well as other parties in six major elections. Chen made an all-out effort to help them because he realized it was an unfair competition between other parties and the DPP, which does not have any party assets.

Watching and waiting for Hillary
　

By Charles Snyder
Wednesday, Mar 04, 2009, Page 8

‘But [Hillary] Clinton does not have either of her predecessors’ experience or gravitas. She is, after all, a politician who is a novice at the international diplomacy game.’

US Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton has a big mouth, and she has put her foot in it many times over the years. She did it again last month when she dismissed the need to push Taiwan issues during her maiden voyage to Beijing as the US’ top diplomat.

Speaking to reporters in Seoul just before she flew to China, Clinton made it clear that Taiwan, along with Tibet and China’s human rights violations generally, would be lost in the shuffle as she and Chinese leaders talked about other things.

She would not press China on Taiwan and the other areas of disagreement between Washington and Beijing because “we pretty much know what they’re going to say,” she told the reporters traveling with her around East Asia.

“We know what they’re going to say because I’ve had those conversations for more than a decade with Chinese leaders, and we know what they’re going to say about Taiwan and military sales, and they know what we’re going to say,” she said.

Underscoring the point, she asserted that “pressing on those issues can’t interfere with” the other items on her agenda: the global financial crisis, environmental issues, Afghanistan, Pakistan and North Korea.

It is true that all of those other issues are make-or-break crises for the US, China and the rest of the world and deserve priority. No question about that.

But ask people in Taiwan whether they feel that their welfare, their future, their security and their health are matters that merely “interfere” with the US’ other concerns.

It may be true that Clinton has spoken with Chinese leaders over the past decade. But in what capacity? As a senator from New York? As a former first lady?

It is one thing to talk to them as a representative of Brooklyn and Buffalo, but it is quite another to speak as the top foreign policy representative of the US and its president.

Former secretaries of state Condoleezza Rice and Colin Powell also knew what China would say about Taiwan during their meetings, but they never dismissed Taiwan’s interests and security publicly because of that. To do so, they well knew, would be interpreted by the Chinese leaders as signals of backsliding on Taiwan, which could be used in Beijing’s propaganda against Taipei.

But Clinton does not have either of her predecessors’ experience or gravitas. She is, after all, a politician who is a novice at the international diplomacy game. She was chosen by US President Barack Obama as much for her political clout, especially among women’s groups, as for her global issues skills.

We are told by sources with insights into the State Department’s East Asia bureau that after she uttered her remarks and they were reported in the media, Clinton immediately realized that she screwed up, to borrow Obama’s expression. She did not mean to belittle Taiwan or leave Taiwan to the wolves, department officials have said to others.

She did not mean “Who cares?” about Taiwan, Tibet or human rights, they said. They added that her comments were parallel to her statements during the trip that economic sanctions against the repressive Myanmar regime have not worked and that a new approach is needed.

What such a new approach would mean in terms of Taiwan is not at all clear.

Nobody in Washington expected any new developments on the Taiwan issue during Clinton’s trip. So many Taiwan supporters in Washington were not particularly disheartened by Clinton’s offhand remarks on Taiwan.

“The US will always be there for Taiwan,” one of Taiwan’s leading supporters in Washington said this week.

Clinton’s trip neither “alleviated nor added to” the concerns over Taiwan policy in the Obama administration, he said.

Observers say there will be no return to the Taiwan policy of Clinton’s husband and former president, Bill, many of whose policies were distasteful to Taiwanese as he pushed to improve relations with China amid strained cross-strait relations.

But Obama’s administration is piled high with former Clinton administration Asia policy stalwarts, who presumably hold much the same ideas they did when they helped establish that earlier policy. One would hope that they have matured since then.

Taiwan and the world have yet to see what the current president, and the current State Department under Clinton, have on their plate as they decide on actions crucial to the fate of Taiwan and its people. Stay tuned.

Charles Snyder is the former Washington correspondent for the Taipei Times.