High Court keeps Chen behind bars
　

SPEAKING OUT: The former president spoke in his own defense at the Taiwan High Court yesterday, in contrast to his refusal to answer questions at the District Court
　

By Shelley Huang
STAFF REPORTER
Friday, Sep 25, 2009, Page 1

The Taiwan High Court yesterday ruled to keep former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) behind bars for another three months, on the grounds that he might flee the country if released.

At 8:45pm last night, an hour later than scheduled, Presiding Judge Teng Chen-chiu (鄧振球) announced the appeals court’s decision to extend Chen’s detention because he was suspected of committing serious crimes and, as a former president, he has more channels to flee the country than an ordinary citizen.

The judges also expressed concern about the large amount of money and other assets the former first family possesses overseas.

Chen had been listening to the judges’ decision while standing up. However, after hearing the judges’ decision, he fell back limply into his chair, looking dejected.

Yesterday morning the High Court conducted a random draw, selecting three judges — Teng, Pong Shing-ming (彭幸鳴) and Pan Tsui-hsueh (潘翠雪) — to preside over Chen’s trial. The selection process was closely watched by the media and legal experts because the Council of Grand Justices has been asked to rule on the constitutionality of the switching of judges in Chen’s case at the Taipei District Court.

In December, a panel of judges replaced Judge Chou Chan-chun (周占春) with Tsai Shou-hsun (蔡守訓) in the trial of Chen and 12 codefendants, prompting allegations of procedural flaws and political interference.

Yesterday morning, about 100 Chen supporters gathered outside the High Court, shouting “A-bian is innocent.”

Hundreds of police officers stood guard to maintain order. Barricades and barbed wire lined the sidewalks surrounding the High Court and Judicial Yuan.

The hearing started at 3:30pm. As Chen entered the courtroom, his supporters in the public seating shouted words of encouragement and addressed him in Hoklo, saying “President A-bian.”

When asked whether Chen would hire his own lawyers, he replied “not currently,” and thanked the court for appointing two public defenders to represent him.

Soon after the hearing began, Chen launched into a long speech about why he should not have been found guilty by the District Court.

He focused most of his efforts on explaining the history and nature of the presidential “state affairs fund,” from which he and his wife Wu Shu-jen (吳淑珍) were found guilty of embezzlement and sentenced to life in prison.

He said that the District Court deemed many expenses incurred from the presidential residence that were reimbursed using the state affairs fund as “embezzlement.”

He listed examples of expenses he believed should be appropriately reimbursed by the fund but were found illegal by the court, from wet towels to haircuts.

“The presidential residence is an extended part of the president’s official duties,” he said, adding that when he was president, he never handled his own accounting and reimbursement procedures.

“Is a president supposed to live without dignity?” he asked, questioning whether the fund could not legally reimburse him for such expenses, especially when used by previous presidents in this way.

He criticized the District Court’s decision to convict him for accepting bribes in a land deal in Longtan (龍潭), Taoyuan County, and from former Taipei Financial Center Corp chairwoman Diana Chen (陳敏薰). He said that it should not have found him guilty just because it believed he knew about his wife taking bribes.

Chen Shui-bian’s readiness to speak in his defense yesterday contrasted with his refusal to answer any questions at the District Court, where he protested in silence at what he called an “unfair judicial system” and his “illegal detention.”

Chen Shui-bian has been detained since Dec. 30 last year.

During his detention hearing yesterday, he offered judges several suggestions, including house arrest or electronic tags. Although judges said these alternatives had been “considered,” they insisted it was necessary to detain the former president for another three months.

On Sept. 11, the District Court found Chen Shui-bian, his wife and 11 codefendants guilty. The former president and his wife were sentenced to life in prison and fined NT$500 million (US$15.4 million).

The latest ruling agitated Chen supporters gathered outside the court and they threw eggs and bottles of water to protest the ruling.

“Injustice! Political persecution!” they shouted after learning the verdict.

Several protesters lay down on the ground and put banners on their bodies reading “Injustice!” and “Human rights are dead,” while others chanted “Go go, A-Bian!”

Police blocked the entrance to the court and kept protesters away from the door as they pushed and tried to enter the court building.

Some supporters sat on the ground, and said they would start a long-term protest and would not leave until Chen was released.

Study warns PRC patience may be tested
　

By William Lowther
STAFF REPORTER IN WASHINGTON
Friday, Sep 25, 2009, Page 1

A Washington conference held on Wednesday to coincide with the release of a new Rand Corporation National Security Research Division study on China and Taiwan heard how Taiwanese identity and public resistance in Taiwan to unification with China could eventually test Beijing’s patience given the recent warming in ties.

The study, entitled A Question of Balance, states that “it is in these very expectations of a new and more accommodating Taiwan government that the seeds of disappointment and future crisis may lie.”

“Among the more profound changes to affect the political balance between Beijing and Taipei has been the growth of a widespread independent Taiwan identity, a sense of distinct ‘Taiwanese-ness,’” the study says.

“The changes in the political, social and cultural identity of [Taiwan’s] population are genuine, significant, and enduring, and these realities strongly suggest that even the most flexible Taipei government will reach its limits of possible accommodation well short of Beijing’s desired position,” the report said.

“The unbridgeable distance between these two positions is not likely to shrink in the coming decade; the opposite may indeed be the case, regardless of which party rules Taiwan,” it said.

China’s growing military power, the study says, may convince its leaders that China possesses credible options that go beyond rhetoric and economic harassment if — “more likely, when” — the next cross-strait crisis erupts.

But it adds that under the administration of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) no one on Taiwan may be inclined to “push the envelope” on independence or related issues any time soon.

One panelist said that under certain circumstances a Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) win in the next Taiwanese presidential election could trigger a military attack.

Roger Cliff, a senior political analyst with the Rand Corporation, said that the scenario worried him.

He said it could happen if at the time of the next Taiwanese presidential election the Chinese government was under pressure from domestic critics for not delivering on issues such as the economy, social stability and foreign policy.

China is currently comfortable Ma’s policies but Ma’s popularity ratings are very low, Cliff said.

He added: “Ma has a couple of years to recover but if the DPP should win the next presidential election, that could be a situation where Beijing might feel compelled to use force in order to hold off those domestic critics.”

The conference, organized by the Center for National Policy, heard earlier from China analyst Toy Reid that “history teaches us that there have been cases in which governments such as the one in China find themselves in domestic hot waters and turn their attention outward in order to distract their people from the lack of good governance at home and ineffective policies.”

“But under the current conditions it would be difficult for the Chinese to concoct such a situation when the president of Taiwan has gone out of his way to accommodate Beijing’s desires,” Reid said.

Cliff said China’s military was in the midst of a transformation that would lead it in the next five to 10 years to become the world’s No. 2 military power. At that point, it could probably prevail against the US in a conflict near its own shores.

He said Beijing had made a sustained effort to become capable of forcing Taiwan to accept unification even if the US intervened militarily.

The study concludes that in the longer term the US and Taiwan must confront a fundamental strategic dilemma — Taiwan lies close to China and very far from the US.

“This geographic asymmetry combined with China’s growing capabilities and the lack of basing options for US forces in the vicinity of the strait, call into question Washington’s ability to credibly serve as guarantor of Taiwan’s security in the future,” the study says.

Kadeer to apply for visa to visit Taiwan in December
　

CROSS-STRAIT KERFUFFLE: Guts United Taiwan president and Chthonic frontman Freddy Lim visited Rebiya Kadeer at her US office to invite her in person
　

By William Lowther
STAFF REPORTER IN WASHINGTON
Friday, Sep 25, 2009, Page 3
　

Kadeer made the remarks after meeting with Guts United Taiwan president Freddy Lim (林昶佐) at her Washington office on Wednesday and accepting his invitation to visit Taiwan.

Beijing has accused Kadeer of inciting ethnic violence and of encouraging China’s Uighur population to stage illegal protests, an allegation Kadeer denies.

Lim, also the front man of Taiwanese black metal band Chthonic (閃靈樂團), was in the Washington area as part of a national tour when he visited Kadeer.

“I greatly admire her. I have asked her to come to Taiwan as my guest. I am already talking with lawyers in Taiwan to get her a visa,” Lim said.

Lim said he decided to invite Kadeer after reading that the documentary about her, The 10 Conditions of Love, had become the center of “an outrageous” controversy at the Kaohsiung Film Festival.

The Kaohsiung City Government originally planned to screen the documentary at its Kaohsiung Film Festival next month, but later decided to screen it this week to end the controversy after tourism industry figures in the city complained that the festival’s plan to include the film had led to a series of hotel cancelations by Chinese tourists.

Saying the film “distorts the facts and glorifies a separatist,” Beijing had also warned Kaohsiung City against damaging cross-strait relations.

Lim said he wanted the film to be shown at colleges throughout Taiwan if Kadeer is granted a visa and visits in December.

Following her meeting with Lim, Kadeer said: “I would love to visit Taiwan, but I have not even applied for the visa yet. I want to tell Taiwanese about our struggle and about the plight of the Uighur people. I hope they will let me visit so that I can tell this human rights story.”

Lim said there is no reason why Kadeer should not be given a visa.

“She has traveled to Japan and European countries without any problems,” Lim said. “Taiwan is still part of the free world.”

In Taipei, Cabinet Spokesman Su Jun-pin (蘇俊賓) yesterday said officials would need to see Kadeer’s visa application before deciding how to handle it. The government has yet to say whether it would welcome her.

Meanwhile, a Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) official, speaking anonymously, said the invitation was a complicated issue for the government.

The official said it would be hard for the administration of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) to reject Kadeer’s application given humanitarian concerns and freedom of speech. Considering a visit by Kadeer “more sensitive” than that of Tibetan spiritual leader the Dalai Lama, who visited last month, the official expressed concern that cross-strait relations would be negatively affected if Kadeer visits.

The Democratic Progressive Pary (DPP), on the other hand, said it plans to screen more documentaries on the Tibetan and Uighur issues and to invite the directors and the individuals concern to visit Taiwan “and experience Taiwan’s democracy.”

“Just because a person is on China’s blacklist, it doesn’t mean they have to be on Taiwan’s,” DPP spokesman Chao Tien-lin (趙天麟) said.

The controversy surrounding the screening of The 10 Conditions of Love highlights that China is the real trouble maker, rudely meddling in Taiwan’s domestic affairs and interfering in freedom of speech and artistic creativity, Chao said.

The Chen saga enters a new stage

Friday, Sep 25, 2009, Page 8

Former president Chen Shui-bian’s (陳水扁) corruption trial moved into the second stage yesterday when responsibility for the case was transferred from the Taipei District Court to the Taiwan High Court.

It can only be hoped that the High Court, prosecutors and the judiciary in general handle the second trial professionally and in line with established legal procedures, unlike the District Court. There is little evidence, however, that they are capable of doing this.

The irregularities during the investigation process and first trial — the press conference by prosecutors vowing to “get” Chen, the almost daily leaking of privileged information, the changing of judges, the skit by prosecutors mocking Chen and the spurious extensions of detention — cast a shadow over the whole episode that only a fair, controversy-free second trial can lift.

The High Court judges randomly selected yesterday — Pong Shing-ming (彭幸鳴), Deng Zhen-giu (鄧振球) and Pan Tsui-hsueh (潘翠雪) — must be allowed to see proceedings through to their conclusion. Their first test was last night’s hearing on whether to grant the former president bail. They failed that test.

The reasons given in previous detention hearings — that Chen could destroy evidence — expired once the first trial concluded. The argument that he has money overseas and therefore presents a flight risk could easily be remedied by either a round-the-clock guard or a monitoring device.

Chen should have been freed. In addition, without his freedom, he and his lawyers will not have the chance to formulate an adequate defense.

The timing of Tuesday’s latest raft of charges against him now looks like an obvious attempt by prosecutors to force the High Court judges to extend Chen’s detention for a further two months — and it worked. Although prosecutors deny this, the fact that the same thing has happened twice before suggests it was no coincidence.

By denying Chen bail again, it is beginning to look increasingly like he will remain behind bars for the rest of his life — regardless of concerns for his rights and due process. This is an extremely worrying turn of events and makes a mockery of this government’s claim that it respects human rights.

Meanwhile, a conclusion is awaited on another extremely important aspect of the case — the inexplicably delayed Council of Grand Justices decision on whether the move to change judges during the first trial was unconstitutional. Asian legal scholar Jerome Cohen said a decision was expected in April and a ruling in Chen’s favor would have invalidated the first trial.

The longer any ruling is delayed, and the longer he is denied bail, the more weight will be given to Chen’s claims of persecution.

As for the former president, he would be better off disassociating himself from the likes of attorney Roger Lin (林志昇) and the misguided attempt to involve US President Barack Obama in his troubles. He should concentrate his legal expertise on deconstructing the ramshackle evidence and abuse of authority that was used to convict him in the first place.

Only by remaining focused on establishing his innocence and not allowing himself to be distracted can Chen hope to tackle the huge obstacles he faces.