|
Taipei prosecutors
find no secret agenda in ‘Dreamers’
NO CASE: The Council for Cultural Affairs did
not violate the law by not holding an open tender for the NT$215m musical, or
picking Stan Lai’s group
By Rich Chang and Chris Wang / Staff reporters
Former Council for Cultural
Affairs minister Emile Sheng talks to reporters yesterday after the Taipei
District Prosecutors’ Office said it had found no evidence of corruption in
relation to the musical “Dreamers” performed in October last year.
Photo: Liu Hsin-de, Taipei Times
The Taipei District Prosecutors’ Office
yesterday closed its investigation into the bidding process of the centennial
musical Dreamers (夢想家), and said that no irregularities were involved.
The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) filed lawsuits in November last year
against President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), then-premier Wu Den-yih (吳敦義) and former
Council for Cultural Affairs minister Emile Sheng (盛治仁), accusing them of
allowing certain performance companies and individuals to profit from staging
the musical to celebrate the 100th anniversary of the Republic of China.
The two-night production was put on as part of the centennial celebrations in
October last year, but drew harsh criticism for its NT$215 million (US$7.15
million) price tag.
Rather than holding a tender for the production, the government directly
contracted the Performance Workshop, a contemporary theater group co-founded by
director Stan Lai (賴聲川), to take charge of the Dreamers project. The
Performance Workshop then tendered out various parts of the project in limited
bids.
The DPP suspected the musical was divided into 13 bids, of which six were
restricted bids worth NT$180 million, to evade the requirements of the Public
Procurement Act (政府採購法).
Taipei District Prosecutors’ Office spokesman Huang Mo-hsin (黃謀信) said
prosecutors found no evidence indicating Ma, Wu or Sheng engaged in corruption
or illegally benefited favored artists.
Huang said that while the Government Procurement Act regulates government
procurement and other related practices, cultural authorities have the right to
open limited bids for performances or other cultural and artistic projects.
Therefore, the council did not violate the law by not holding an open tender for
the production, Huang said.
Prosecutors said their investigation concluded that neither Ma nor Wu gave
concrete instructions to hire Lai to serve as the artistic director for the
musical.
The NT$215 million budget for the project was decided upon by Sheng after he
looked into other musical production projects produced domestically and
internationally, Huang said.
Huang said although prosecutors believed government officials did not break any
criminal laws in the case, the bidding process had some flaws, and the district
prosecutors’ office would suggest the Executive Yuan look into officials’
executive responsibilities.
The Ministry of Culture, which was formerly the Council for Cultural Affairs,
said it has begun a probe to determine whether any officials were guilty of
administrative mistakes or negligence.
Sheng, who is now the president of a private business group, expressed relief at
the prosecutors’ decision and said the closing of the case cleared his name.
He said that although he always knew he was innocent, the case has weighed him
down like a big rock in the heart.
“Now the big rock has finally been removed,” said Sheng, who resigned as head of
the council in November after he was accused of corruption in planning the
musical.
Performance Workshop manager Hsieh Ming-chang (謝明昌) praised the prosecutors’
decision for “clearing everybody’s names.”
However, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) criticized the prosecutors for
dismissing the case, saying it confirmed the party’s belief the judiciary is
biased against pan-green politicians.
“The way the Taipei Prosecutors’ Office dismissed the case would neither
persuade the DPP, society nor the arts and cultural communities,” DPP
spokesperson Lin Chun-hsien (林俊憲) said.
“The musical cost NT$200 million for two nights and the entire tendering process
was questionable. However, the prosecutors decided to accept everything Sheng
told them,” Lin said. “The case will forever be a stain.”
DPP politicians have experienced a string of recent decisions and developments
they believe reflects the judicial system’s bias against the green camp,
including the Control Yuan’s decision to impeach former DPP secretary-general Su
Jia-chyuan (蘇嘉全) over his controversial farmhouse in Pingtung County and its
pledge to keep investigating former DPP chairperson Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) in
connection with the so-called Yu Chang Biologics Inc case even though
prosecutors cleared Tsai of any wrongdoing last month.
Lin said the DPP could not accept the judiciary’s unfair treatment of pan-green
and pan-blue politicians, as it “goes after DPP politicians like hunters and
almost always favors politicians from the blue camp.”
The persistent bias was why several DPP lawmakers, including Wu Ping-jui (吳秉叡)
and Huang Wei-cher (黃偉哲), said they were not surprised at the dismissal, while
Tuan Yi-kang (段宜康) described the dismissal as “ridiculous.”
Commenting on the case, Neil Peng (馮光遠), award-winning screenwriter of The
Wedding Banquet (喜宴) said the result was expected because “looking at decisions
made on judiciary cases in recent years, there is a pattern that cases are
dropped if they have anything to do with Ma.”
Additional reporting by CNA and Staff writer
|
