Beijing blocking ‘Cape No. 7’: GIO
　

By Flora Wang
STAFF REPORTER
Tuesday, Dec 02, 2008, Page 1

A Government Information Office (GIO) official said yesterday that China had postponed the opening of the hit Taiwanese film Cape No. 7 (海角七號).

Frank Chen (陳志寬), director of the GIO’s Department of Motion Pictures, said LS Time Movie, the company that represents Cape No. 7, received an e-mail from its Chinese counterpart on Nov. 19 saying “[Chinese] customs and the publisher still need to negotiate some problems.”

The Chinese-language United Daily News quoted anonymous sources yesterday as saying Chinese officials had scuttled the plan to release Cape No. 7.

Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait (ARATS) Chairman Chen Yunlin (陳雲林) told a conference in Beijing on Friday that the movie was tainted by its portrayal of Taiwanese who had been subject to “colonial brainwashing” and that traces of Japan’s kominka (assimilation) policy were evident, the paper said.

The paper said senior Chinese officials believed releasing the film could fuel nationalistic feelings, which would be counter to the peaceful atmosphere that Taiwan and China have been promoting.

Cape No. 7 is Taiwan’s most successful movie in years, earning more than NT$231 million (US$6.9 million) since its release on Aug. 22 and becoming the second top-grossing movie after Titanic.

The film is about a failed rocker who returns to his hometown and ends up playing in the opening act for a Japanese pop star and falling in love with a Japanese publicist. A voice-over tells the story of a Japanese man who fell in love with a Taiwanese woman, reading from love letters written by the man just after the end of World War II.

LS Time Movie chairman Wang Ying-hsiang (王應祥) told the GIO it had been asked to delay sending the movie to China, Chen said.

Frank Chen said the GIO would seek the help of ARATS to resolve the matter.

“[We] hope this movie will be released in China as soon as possible so that people in China will be able to experience the charm of Cape No. 7 and understand Taiwanese culture,” he said, adding: “Wang never said anything about it.”

“Cape No. 7 describes the culture of Taiwan and the bonds between people. I believe anyone would be moved by it,” he said.

Meanwhile, Democratic Progressive Party spokesman Cheng Wen-tsang (鄭文燦) said censorship would make it difficult for Chinese to learn about Taiwan’s democracy and pluralistic society. Although Chen Yunlin had a smile on his face during his visit to Taipei, his reaction to the movie showed his real face, Cheng said.
　

Sustainability is key: ICSU head
　

ROLE MODEL: Lee Yuan-tseh said that he had graduated with two aspirations — to become a good scientist and to build a good society with like-minded people
　

By Meggie Lu
STAFF REPORTER
Tuesday, Dec 02, 2008, Page 2

Humans should seek sustainable development instead of over-milking the environment and establish an international structure that seeks welfare for all humanity, former Academia Sinica president Lee Yuan-tseh (李遠哲) told a press conference yesterday held in honor of his election as the next president of the International Council of Science (ICSU).

The ICSU is a scientific nongovernmental organization with a global membership of 116 states.

“The ICSU was founded in 1931 and has a mission of enhancing international scientific activities and promoting social welfare for humanity,” Academia Sinica President Wong Chi-huey (翁啟惠) said.

Lee’s election was a big step for Taiwan in terms of scientific diplomacy, Wong said.

Besides being an outstanding scientist, Lee has also devoted his time to humanitarian issues, Wong said.

Wong said that following his inauguration Lee was sure to work for sustainable development, reducing climate change, promoting public health and fighting poverty.

“Though I hesitated about entering the election … I have some dreams and expectations [for scientists],” Lee said.

“This is a big honor and a big responsibility,” Lee said, thanking a number of academics for their support and help in his election campaign.

Lee said that he had graduated from high school with two aspirations: to become a good scientist and to build a good society with like-minded people.

As the president-elect of ICSU starting in 2011, Lee told the audience that he had two thoughts to share.

“One, in the 20th century, humans passed a threshold in energy consumption and [some countries] have become overdeveloped. I do not believe in the direction in which ‘developed countries’ lead ‘underdeveloped’ ones to develop. There are only countries that are overdeveloped and countries that haven’t been overdeveloped,” Lee said.

“Secondly, globalization is only half-complete. Though governments in individual countries collect taxes and resolve national problems, we do not have [an effective] platform for the collaboration of nations to handle world problems,” he said.

“When people still suffer from unemployment, hunger, health problems and poverty, society will not be safe,” Lee said.

“[The problem could be resolved] through education in which people’s level of scientific knowledge is improved,” Lee said, when answering a question about how scientists should close the gap between the high expectations that scientists have for society and the expectations of the public.

“Since [many] research projects are supported by tax dollars, if our dreams are not supported by the public, they will not be realized,” Lee said.

“The existence of a gap would reflect a failure to explain [our findings] to the public,” Lee said.
　

KMT supporting corruption: Chai
　

'BLACK GOLD': The DPP lawmaker slammed a KMT proposal to strip officials of their titles only after a third trial and to remove the limit on the duration of each trial
　

By Rich Chang
STAFF REPORTER
Tuesday, Dec 02, 2008, Page 3

Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislators yesterday accused the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) of reviving “black gold” politics with a proposed amendment that would help party legislators whose election victories have been annulled to keep their posts.

DPP Legislator Chai Trong-rong (蔡同榮) told a press conference that KMT legislators had proposed an amendment to the Public Officials Election and Recall Law (公職人員選舉罷免法) that stipulates that elected officials whose election victories have been annulled would only lose their posts after a third and final trial, with no time limit imposed on the duration of each trial.

Chai said the current law removes elected officials from their post after losing a second trial; each trial must also be completed within six months.

The Yunlin District Court on Friday annulled the election victory of KMT Legislator Chang Sho-wen (張碩文) in a first trial. Chang's rival, DPP legislative candidate Liu Chien-kuo (劉建國), filed a lawsuit in January, accusing Chang of bribery.

Chang said he would appeal the decision.

“The amendment is aimed at prolonging the trials and helping KMT legislators maintain their posts. With such a law, Chang would be able to finish his term because the final verdict would be delayed indefinitely,” Chai said.

Of the 60 KMT lawmakers elected to local constituencies, five have seen their victories annulled, and the KMT aims to keep them in their posts by amending the law, the DPP legislator said.

By assisting questionable legislators, Chai said the KMT was attempting to revive “black gold” politics, or political corruption.

KMT caucus whip Lin Yi-shih (林益世) shrugged off the DPP's criticism, saying the bill had been proposed a while ago and that both the KMT and the DPP could deliberate over how to amend the law.

Lin accused the DPP of attempting to discredit the KMT, saying a single legislator's proposal did not reflect the stance of the entire caucus on amending the law.

Police chief waves flag to pacify councilors
　

CONFRONTATION: DPP councilors demanded an apology and gave Chiayi County's new police chief a choice between the ROC flag and the PRC flag

STAFF WRITER, WITH CNA
Tuesday, Dec 02, 2008, Page 3

Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Chiayi County councilors yesterday blocked the newly appointed head of the county's police bureau outside the county hall, accusing him of mishandling clashes between police and protesters during the visit of Chinese envoy Chen Yunlin (陳雲林) to Taipei early last month.

Hsieh Wen-chieh (謝文傑) was only allowed to enter the Chiayi County Council after he apologized publicly for the melee by displaying a national flag.

Hsieh, who was the head of Taipei City Police's Zhongshan Precinct (中山分局) during Chen's visit, attended a handover ceremony presided over by Deputy Director-General of the National Police Agency Liu Chin-chang (劉勤章) yesterday morning, and proceeded to the council hall for questioning.

Dozens of DPP councilors blocked him at the gate of the council hall, while displaying photographs of police clashes with protesters during Chen's visit. They accused Hsieh of failing to safeguard Taiwan's sovereignty, saying his actions had caused considerable harm to Taiwanese.

The two sides refused to budge until Chiayi County Council Speaker Yu Cheng-ta (余政達) came out to negotiate. Hsieh finally agreed to apologize publicly for the clashes by carrying a national flag, saying he was willing to apologize if his handling of the matter had angered the councilors.

Forced to choose between a People's Republic of China flag and a Republic of China (ROC) flag, Hsieh said that he would of course choose the ROC flag because Taiwan is an independent, sovereign state and because he is an ROC citizen.

DPP councilors urged him to maintain public order and refrain from resorting to violence when dealing with the public.

Cross-strait peace pact is unlikely: prediction center
　

By Ko Shu-ling
STAFF REPORTER
Tuesday, Dec 02, 2008, Page 3

The visit of Chinese cross-strait negotiator Chen Yunlin (陳雲林) would not help boost the number of Chinese tourists to Taiwan nor would it increase the possibility of signing a cross-strait common market or peace agreement with China, the latest analysis released by a prediction center showed.

The study, conducted by National Chengchi University's Center for Prediction Markets, found that the market was not optimistic about the impact of Chen's visit on the number of Chinese visiting Taiwan.

During his visit early last month, Chen signed four agreements with his Taiwanese counterpart, Straits Exchange Foundation Chairman Chiang Pin-kung (江丙坤). The four agreements covered cross-strait aviation routes, sea transportation links, postal services and a food safety mechanism.

The administration hopes that with more convenient cross-strait transportation, more Chinese tourists would visit Taiwan and boost the economy.

However, the possibility that the number of Chinese tourists visiting Taiwan would not exceed that of the previous two years rose to 85 percent after Chen's visit, from 82 percent, the report said.

Statistics showed that more than 98,000 Chinese tourists visited Taiwan in 2006, but the number dropped to about 81,000 last year. The center predicted that the number of Chinese visitors this year would not surpass the numbers of the past two years.

The chances that Taiwan and China would not sign an agreement on setting up a cross-strait common market increased from 93 percent to 98 percent, the report said. The likelihood that both sides would not sign a peace pact also rose from 95 percent to 99 percent.

The center said that although tensions in the Taiwan Strait had eased since the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) came to power, the public remained cautious about the possibility of an end to cross-strait hostilities or progress in cross-strait relations.

Despite the four accords signed between Chen and Chiang last month, the report said the odds that Taipei and Beijing would sign a pact to end hostilities or advance peace were as little as 1 percent.

By the same token, the public was pessimistic about the probability that both sides would sign an accord on establishing a cross-strait common market.

However, the public seemed to have high hopes for the two giant pandas that China has offered as gifts to Taiwan.

The plausibility that the pair would come to Taiwan this month surged to 79 percent after Chen's visit from 39 percent before.

The center makes predictions on various issues, including politics, economy, cross-strait affairs, international affairs, social affairs, sports and entertainment. Those interested in future predictions are welcome to join the future event-trading house, Swarchy. Members can tender virtual bidding on diverse events and the bidding price will serve as the reference for the predictions on the targeted issues.

Wo Weihan: ‘spy’, father, victim

Tuesday, Dec 02, 2008, Page 8

China’s execution on Friday of medical researcher Wo Weihan (伍維漢), 59, on charges of passing on “secrets” to a group affiliated with Taiwanese intelligence was a disgraceful act that warrants far more than the condemnation Beijing received from the US, the EU and a handful of rights organizations.

As Amnesty International and other critics pointed out, Wo’s confession that he discussed the health of a senior Chinese official and copied military data from unclassified magazines was made under duress. Even under Chinese law, however, Wo’s alleged offenses were so trivial and so unremarkable that the death penalty could not have been justified.

Apart from failing to modernize its antique definition of “state secrets,” Beijing also missed an opportunity to show Taiwan some of the “goodwill” President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has been desperately seeking by sparing the life of an alleged Taiwanese intelligence asset. Nothing would have demonstrated that cross-strait relations had turned the page more dramatically than for Beijing to void a death sentence against a man who, if indeed guilty, stood as a symbol of the warring relationship of old, when spies, rather than envoys, defined the state of affairs between the rivals (Wo was arrested in Beijing in January 2005).

By failing to do so, China showed that cross-strait “peace” initiatives will not temper its pursuit of unforgiving objectives, destroying lives and families in the process.

The move did nothing to embellish Beijing’s reputation abroad, where hundreds of Chinese agents, students and businesspeople steal secrets — real secrets, as opposed to health information or articles from unclassified magazines — from Western countries. To give one example, the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission, created by the US Congress in 2000 to monitor US-China issues, wrote in its annual report last month that “China is stealing vast amounts of sensitive information from US computer networks,” echoing conclusions from the previous year that Beijing was pursuing new technology “aggressively” through research and business deals and industrial espionage.

Other states have long considered Beijing to be the world’s foremost economic and military spy, whether targeting individuals, groups or governments.

If the West were to sentence to death every Chinese operative caught red-handed in an act of espionage and every employee of Xinhua news agency — long identified by Western counter-intelligence as an arm of Chinese intelligence — death row would run the length of the Great Wall.

To its discredit, Taipei remained silent in the days leading to Wo’s execution. After all, if Wo did work with Taiwanese intelligence, the least Taipei could have done for one of its assets was try to come to the man’s rescue.

If Wo was innocent, as he claimed to the day he died, the Cabinet could have easily established this by liaising with intelligence agencies and placing pressure on the Chinese to do the right thing.

Perhaps, as many states do when sensitive matters unfold, Taipei worked behind the scenes and contacted Beijing in an attempt to have the sentence overturned.

Absent official comment, there is no way of knowing. Still, Taipei could have easily taken the moral high ground on the matter by publicly calling for Wo’s life to be spared.

But it didn’t, and this silence was an act of cowardice that reflects very poorly on the Ma administration. Wo’s daughters, not to mention members of Taiwan’s intelligence community who place their lives at risk, would be justified in demanding hard answers.

Eroding justice: Open letter No. 2

Tuesday, Dec 02, 2008, Page 8

‘Under the present circumstances it is hard to see how the persons involved ... can have a fair trial in Taiwan.’

The Honorable Wang Ching-feng,

Minister of Justice,

Taipei, Taiwan


Dear Minister Wang [王清峰],

In an open letter to the Taipei Times published on Nov. 25, you responded to our joint statement regarding the erosion of justice in Taiwan. We appreciate your acknowledgement of the sincerity of our concerns, and are grateful to receive a prompt and serious reply.

Based on the information available to us, however, we remain concerned about choices made by prosecutors in applying existing legal authority and strongly believe in the need for reform. Please allow us to highlight a number of specific points:

1. The procedure of “preventive detention”: This procedure is obviously intended for serious criminal cases in which the suspect is likely to flee the country. In his Nov. 13 article in the South China Morning Post, Professor Jerome Cohen states that “it ought to be invoked rarely.”

Yet, during the past weeks, it has been used across the board, and it has been used only against present and former members of Democratic Progressive Party [DPP] governments. This casts severe doubts on the impartiality of the judicial system. We also wish to point out that the people involved were detained under deplorable circumstances, and that they were not even allowed to see relatives.

2. Your open letter contains the argument that when they were detained, the present and former DPP government officials “were all informed of the charges that had been brought against them.” This is simply not correct. When they were detained, they were subjected to lengthy interrogations — in some cases for up to 20 hours — which bore the character of a “fishing expedition,” and do not represent a formal indictment in any legal sense. In most cases the prosecutors had had months to collect information; if they did have sufficient evidence of wrongdoing, they should have formally charged the persons and let them have their day in a scrupulously impartial court of law. That would be the desirable procedure under the rule of law in a democratic society.

3. Your open letter also states that the persons involved had “the right and ability to communicate with their attorneys to seek legal assistance.” It neglects to mention, however, that in all cases where people were detained, the discussions with the lawyers were recorded and videotaped while a guard took notes. This information was then immediately transmitted to the respective prosecutors. We don’t need to point out that this is a grave infringement on international norms regarding lawyer-client privilege and makes mounting an adequate defense problematic at best.

4. On the issue of leaks to the press, your letter states that, under the Code of Criminal Procedure, information from ongoing investigations can only be disclosed by spokespersons of the prosecutor’s offices and that unauthorized disclosure is subject to criminal prosecution. The fact of the matter is that during the past weeks, the media have been filled with information on the ongoing investigations that could only have come from the prosecutors. We may point out one example, but there are numerous others:

Only a few hours after former minister of foreign affairs Mark Chen [陳唐山] was questioned on Nov. 3, Taiwan’s Apple Daily newspaper ran an article saying that “the prosecutors are thinking of charging Dr Chen in relation to the case.”

The issue of violation of the principle of secret investigation was also raised by Shilin District Court Judge Hung Ying-hua [洪英花], who strongly criticized the present situation and procedures followed by your ministry in a Liberty Times article on Nov. 17.

We may also mention that we find it highly peculiar that no steps whatsoever have been taken against the various prosecutors who leaked information, while we just learned that the Ministry of Justice is now taking steps against Mr Cheng Wen-long [鄭文龍], the lawyer for former president Chen Shui-bian [陳水扁], who supposedly “leaked” information to the press. The ministry sent a formal request to the Taipei District Prosecutor’s Office asking the office to investigate and prosecute, and sent a formal request to the Taiwan Lawyers Association that asked the association to review the case and see whether Cheng should have his license revoked.

It is our understanding that the statements Mr Cheng made were in relation to former president Chen’s views on Taiwan’s situation and its future, and an expression of love for his wife, but did not have any bearing on the case against him. We hope you realize that if the ministry proceeds along these lines, this will be perceived as a direct confirmation of the strong political bias of the judicial system.

5. Your letter states that it is untrue that Taiwan’s judicial system is susceptible to political manipulation. If this is the case, how can it be explained that in the past weeks, only DPP officials have been detained and given inhumane treatment such as handcuffing and lengthy questioning, while obvious cases of corruption by members of the KMT — including in the Legislative Yuan — are left untouched by the prosecutors or at best are stalled in the judicial process?

We may also refer to expressions of concern by Professor Cohen and by lawyer Nigel Li [李念祖], who expressed his deep concerns about preventive detentions in the China Times’ editorial for Nov. 9. In the editorial, Mr Li praised remarks made by prosecutor Eric Chen [陳瑞仁], who was part of the legal team prosecuting the special fund cases, that the prosecutors’ offices should “avoid the appearance of targeting only one particular political group.”

The fact that the Special Investigation Task Force was set up under the DPP administration or that the prosecutor general was nominated by former president Chen is not at issue here. The problem is that the present system is being used in a very partial fashion.

We may add that the fact that you yourself have publicly discussed the content of the cases does create a serious imbalance in the playing field, and undermines the basic dictum that a person should be considered innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Under the present circumstances it is hard to see how the persons involved — including former president Chen — can have a fair trial in Taiwan.

6. Lastly, a statement by the US State Department is interpreted in your letter as an “endorsement” of Taiwan’s legal system and the procedures followed. It should be noted that in international diplomatic language, the term “we have every expectation” means “we are concerned and we will watch the situation closely.”

For the past two decades, Taiwan has faced a difficult situation internationally. What has given Taiwan important credibility in democratic countries around the world has been its democratization. We fear that the current judicial procedures being used in Taiwan endanger this democratization, and endanger the goodwill that Taiwan has developed internationally.

In conclusion, we do remain deeply disturbed by the erosion of justice in Taiwan, and express the sincere hope and expectation that your government will maintain fair and impartial judicial practices and quickly correct the present injustices. As an editorial in the Nov. 20 issue of the London-based Economist indicated, Taiwan is “hungry for justice,” and we also hope that your government will be willing to initiate judicial reform that would move Taiwan toward a fully fair and impartial judicial system that earns the respect and admiration of democratic countries around the world.

Respectfully yours,

(in alphabetical order)

Nat Bellocchi
Former American Institute in Taiwan chairman
Coen Blaauw
Formosan Association for Public Affairs, Washington
Gordon G. Chang
Author, “The Coming
Collapse of China”
Assoc. Prof. Stéphane Corcuff
University of Lyon
Prof. June Teufel Dreyer
University of Miami
Prof. Edward Friedman
University of Wisconsin
Dr. Mark Harrison
University of Tasmania
Prof. Bruce Jacobs
Monash University
Richard C. Kagan
Professor Emeritus,
Hamline University
Jerome Keating
Author and former
associate professor,
National Taipei University
Assoc. Prof. Daniel Lynch
University of Southern California
Prof. Victor H. Mair
University of Pennsylvania
Assoc. Prof. Donald Rodgers
Austin College, Texas
Prof. Terence Russell
University of Manitoba
Prof. Scott Simon
University of Ottawa
Michael Stainton
York Center for Asia Research, Toronto
Prof. Peter Tague
Georgetown University
John J. Tkacik Jr
Senior Research Fellow,
The Heritage Foundation
Prof. Arthur Waldron
University of Pennsylvania
Prof. Vincent Wei-cheng Wang
University of Richmond
Gerrit van der Wees
Editor, “Taiwan Communiqué”
Assoc. Prof. David Curtis Wright
University of Calgary
Stephen Yates
President of DC Asia Advisory and former deputy assistant to the vice president for national security affairs

Secret deals cast a long shadow over judiciary
　

By Lin Chien-cheng 林健正
Tuesday, Dec 02, 2008, Page 8

‘It is hard to know exactly what agreements were reached but the SIP obviously made huge sacrifices in terms of judicial fairness.’

One of the main reasons the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lost power in the 2000 election was corruption and “black gold” politics.

This “black gold” basically consisted of questionable relations between the KMT and businesses. This year, questionable relations between politics and business led to the jailing of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁).

However, the investigation into Chen’s alleged money laundering by the Special Investigation Panel (SIP) has revealed another questionable type of relationship between the government and business world that has made the public lose trust in the judicial system.

The SIP summoned former Chinatrust Financial Holding Co vice chairman Jeffrey Koo Jr (辜仲諒) back to Taiwan from Japan. Prosecutors first went to Japan, where Koo has been on the run for two years, to meet him in secret. Koo then decided to return home to face questioning. Media reports said Koo’s confession was in line with what the SIP was looking for.

Despite being a fugitive for two years, Koo surprisingly was not detained, had no restrictions placed on where he could live or on traveling outside the country. This clearly shows that Koo and the SIP made a deal before he returned home.

It is hard to know exactly what agreements were reached but the SIP obviously made huge sacrifices in terms of judicial fairness.

What we can be certain of is that more examples of injustice and secret dealings will become apparent in the handling and prosecution of Chen and Koo.

So far the SIP has taken over all six criminal cases involving Koo, giving it complete control of the investigations and a lot of bargaining chips when dealing with the Koo family.

But since the SIP conducted a secret meeting with a wanted criminal in Japan, it may find itself in a dilemma during future investigations and prosecutions. It will also be hard for it to regain the public’s trust.

The SIP not only sent a prosecutor to meet a wanted criminal and make an under-the-table deal for his return, it also asked for a NT$100 million (US$3 million) bail deal from the court to cover up the agreement.

This highlights the exchange of interests and a special relationship between the government and the business world, even though this time around the prosecutors are doing the Koo family a favor.

When Koo returned to Taiwan, his father, Chinatrust Financial Holding Co chairman Jeffrey Koo (辜濂松), just happened to be in Peru accompanying former vice president Lien Chan (連戰) at the APEC summit.

This clearly shows the relationship the government and the business world have formed since President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) government came to power.

Lin Chien-cheng is a professor in the Department of Materials Science and Engineering at National Chiao Tung University.