DPP rejects Hu Jintao's 'olive branch'
　

'SPLITTIST': The Chinese president promised goodwill gestures if the Democratic Progressive Party recognizes its ‘one China’ policy and drops its independence bid
　

By Rich Chang and Ko Shu-ling
STAFF REPORTERS, WITH AGENCIES
Thursday, Jan 01, 2009, Page 1
　

The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) yesterday rejected an offer from Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤), after he appealed directly to the DPP for the first time to give up its stance on independence, offering an olive branch to Taiwanese seeking representation in international bodies.

Hu, in a speech to mark the 30th anniversary of Beijing's “open letter to Taiwanese compatriots,” yesterday called for a pragmatic approach to the political relationship to ease concerns over tensions across the Taiwan Strait.

“As long as the ‘one China’ principle is recognized by both sides ... we can discuss anything,” Hu told a gathering of the Communist Party elite at the Great Hall of the People.

If the DPP gives up “splittist activities” and “changes its attitude,” it would elicit a “positive response,” Hu said.

China and Taiwan could at a proper time begin contacts and exchanges on military issues and explore a mechanism to build trust on military matters, Hu said.

He vowed to maintain already flourishing business ties.

In response, the DPP said in a press statement that Taiwan is a sovereign state, and its sovereignty belongs to the nation's 23 million people; hence, Taiwan's future must be decided by its people, which is the DPP’s fundamental position and mainstream public opinion in the country.

In a democracy, nobody has a right to ask people to give up any position. China must recognize that fact, it added.

The statement said the major question between Taiwan and China is not what position the DPP advocates, but what comes to mind when Taiwanese think about China.

Most Taiwanese think of the military threat, diplomatic oppression, the economic draw and the various methods China uses to localize Taiwan's government, it said.

Because China has ignored the real feelings of Taiwanese, it remains impossible for Taiwan and China to develop sincere, harmonious relations, it added.

The statement said if the Chinese government wanted to have talks with the DPP, it should not ask the party to change its position first. Real talks can only be started without any preconditions.

In the speech, Hu also said he understood Taiwan's desire to take part in “international activities,” but stressed that China would not tolerate any move that suggested independence.

“We understand the Taiwanese public's feelings on participating in international activities, and we attach great importance to related issues,” Hu said.

“We can have realistic negotiations to reach a reasonable approach for the issue of Taiwan participating in the activities of international organizations as long as it is not on the premise of two Chinas, or one China, one Taiwan,” he said.

With about 170 diplomatic allies to Taiwan's 23, China has continually blocked Taiwan's bid to join the UN or affiliated organizations.

Today marks the 30th anniversary of the US switching diplomatic recognition from Taiwan to China, as well as Beijing's announcement that it would stop shelling Kinmen and that its policy toward Taiwan would shift from “liberation” through military invasion to “peaceful reunification.”

The Presidential Office yesterday welcomed Hu's comments.

“Our cross-strait policy has proved popular and been supported by the Taiwanese public and international community,” Presidential Office Spokesman Wang Yu-chi (王郁琦) said.

However, “we respect different political theories and thinking because Taiwan is a pluralistic and democratic society, and people are entitled to different opinions on Taiwan's future,” Wang said.

As both sides are in a critical stage of political and economic development, Wang said it should be the common interest and wish of the two sides to cherish and consolidate peace in the Taiwan Strait.

Wang also praised Hu's leadership, saying his new approach and practicality had helped promote bilateral ties.

The Mainland Affairs Council yesterday issued a boilerplate response to Hu's comments.

The council issued a statement saying it would study the feasibility of Hu's call on signing a peace agreement and establishing a military confidence building mechanism “when cross-strait relations reach a certain degree.”

“At the moment, economic and cultural exchanges are the issues that concern the people most and urgently need to be dealt with. Positive results will help build the solid foundation of mutual trust,” it said.

The council also called on Beijing to understand the urgency and expectation of Taiwanese who want to participate in the international community.

It urged both sides to “shelve differences and pursue a win-win situation,” saying two sides should concertedly open a new chapter on peaceful development of cross-strait relations.

The statement said that the administration's cross-strait policy is to maintain the so-called “status quo” under the framework of the Republic of China Constitution. In other words, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) will not discuss unification with Beijing during his presidency, nor will he pursue or support de jure Taiwanese independence or use military force to resolve the Taiwan issue, it said.

All cross-strait issues must go through the institutionalized negotiation mechanism and be properly dealt with under the principle of equality and dignity, the statement said.

“The government will insist at the negotiation table that Taiwan is always the focus and public interest comes first,” the statement said. “Cross-strait rapprochement is conducive to peace in the Taiwan Strait, the region and the world.”

The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), however, seemed more excited about Hu's talk.

The party issued a statement welcoming Hu's comments, saying the party was glad to see Hu respond positively to its effort to expand Taiwan's international space, establishing a military confidence building mechanism and signing a peace agreement.

Emphasizing that the party attaches great importance to Taiwan's safety, prosperity and dignity, the statement said that the KMT was committed to pursuing the best interest of the Taiwanese and hoped that these goals could be gradually achieved in the foreseeable future.

It also stated that the semi-official negotiation channel was irreplaceable and that the exchange platform between KMT and Chinese Communist Party was an important model.

The KMT admitted that there were some differences that could not be resolved overnight, but said that as long as both sides understand this, put aside differences and create a win-win situation, they would eventually be resolved.

KMT Legislator John Chiang (蔣孝嚴), a former minister of foreign affairs, said he believed Hu was extending goodwill to Taiwan.

“I think Hu mentioned the issue in a bid to show goodwill [to Taiwan] and [tell us that the issue] could be negotiated and reasonably arranged,” Chiang said when asked for comment.

“In the past, similar issues were not negotiable at all,” he said.

Stop meddling with the Chen case, Lu tells Chiu Yi
　

By Ko Shu-ling
STAFF REPORTER
Thursday, Jan 01, 2009, Page 3
　

Former vice president Annette Lu (呂秀蓮) yesterday called on Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Legislator Chiu Yi (邱毅) to stop letting his personal grievances cloud his judgment and to end his efforts to influence the case against former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁).

Lu, who visited Chen at the Taipei Detention Center yesterday morning, told reporters after the visit that Chen told her he did not remember doing anything that could have offended Chiu.

There has been speculation that the case against Chen and the former first family is the result of personal grudges Chiu is holding against Chen. Lu said she asked Chen what he had done that could have motivated Chiu to seek vengeance against him.

Chen told her he did not remember.

While the case has political significance because the principal defendant is a former president, Lu said it would be a serious matter if a person’s individual motivations were allowed to influence the judicial system.

Lu called on Chiu to stop meddling in the judiciary’s affairs and to remember that Chen had granted him an amnesty so he could be released in time for the legislative elections last January.

Chen granted amnesty to prisoners serving a sentence of 18 months or less. Chiu was sentenced to 14 months in prison for his violent conduct during a protest at the Kaohsiung District Court following the 2004 presidential election. Chiu began serving jail time in April 2007, but was released in November the same year.

Lu also urged President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and Judicial Yuan President Lai In-jaw (賴英照) — both Harvard graduates, like Lu — to respect the judiciary and establish a national human rights committee.

Amateur-hour justice follies

Thursday, Jan 01, 2009, Page 8

Concern over the neutrality of the nation’s judiciary and its officials since President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) assumed office will only be heightened by the circumstances surrounding the Taipei District Court’s decision early on Tuesday to detain former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) ahead of his trial.

The reasons cited by prosecutors — that he was at risk of fleeing the country and that his being free could stop witnesses from talking — were preposterous, and were rejected in the first two District Court hearings.

The new judges who delivered the latest verdict, however, believe that a former president under 24-hour protection by a state-funded security detail could make his way off the island without anyone noticing, and that he might personally threaten witnesses like a low-rent thug.

It is a perplexing decision, to put it politely.

The in-depth coverage that Chen’s alleged crimes have received in local media over the last few months seems to have succeeded in convincing a majority of people — including members of the judiciary — that Chen is the biggest tyrant in this part of the world since Genghis Khan. Even so, in the eyes of the law — if not all of the law’s guardians — he remains innocent until proven guilty.

The other major cause for concern is last week’s replacement of the original Taipei District Court judge in the case, Chou Chan-chun (周占春), who was demonized and threatened with impeachment by Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) politicians after releasing Chen without bail and then confirming the decision on appeal.

Judge Chou’s removal from the case came just a few days after several KMT politicians called for his replacement based on unproven allegations from KMT Legislator Chiu Yi (邱毅) — a convicted criminal and member of the Judiciary, Organic Laws and Statutes Committee — that Judge Chou had said Ma should have been jailed for misusing his mayoral allowance as Taipei mayor.

The judge’s removal was unprecedented for such a high-profile case, while the timing of the KMT politicians’ threats and the court’s inexplicable voting out of Judge Chou casts doubt on the integrity of all involved.

But this is not the first apparently politically motivated maneuver in the Chen case.

Back in September, in a move that can only be read as a nod to higher-ups, the Special Investigation Panel prosecutors in charge of the probe held a press conference to announce that they would step down if they failed to bring the case to court by year’s end.

Then, two members of a high-profile business family — one a fugitive — turned state witness and agreed to testify about allegedly illegal business deals involving Chen’s family. Somehow the fugitive managed to avoid detention after his return from Japan.

Then came the incredible claim from the District Court on Tuesday that it would be difficult to prosecute Chen if he were not kept in custody.

Add all these elements together and independent observers could be forgiven for thinking that this crucial and complex trial is degenerating into an amateurish celebrity witch-hunt.

The reputation of top judicial officials is in jeopardy. Add to this the perception of a politicized Taipei District Court and little wonder the expression “kangaroo court” is beginning to do the rounds.

Given the antipathy that Chen has generated among people on his own side of politics, the fact that he is generating increasing amounts of sympathy points to a court and prosecutorial system on the brink of losing public confidence.