|
EDITORIAL: Making
China’s judiciary look good
President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) removal of Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng
(王金平) was the climax of an obvious political struggle. Ma’s rationale for the
surprise attack was that influence peddling has no place in the judicial
process, but his all-out assault on Wang will have a worse effect on the
development of democracy and a constitutional government than any amount of
influence peddling could have.
All the Special Investigation Division (SID) has in its case against Wang are
conclusions based on a couple of sentences overheard through possibly illegal
wiretapping and its distorted understanding of Taiwan High Prosecutors’ Office
prosecutor Lin Shiow-tao’s (林秀濤) testimony. Without even concluding its
investigation, the SID bypassed the Cabinet and reported the case to Ma and then
announced it to the public at a press conference, along with its phone-tapping
records. It did so in violation of proper judicial procedure and the
Communication Security and Surveillance Act (通訊保障及監察法).
To get rid of Wang, Ma even sacrificed former minister of justice Tseng Yung-fu
(曾勇夫), who was forced to resign by Premier Jiang Yi-huah (江宜樺). When Tseng asked
for a reason, Jiang said there was none. However, the reason was to create the
impression that there really was something to the allegations of influence
peddling.
Ma never intended to give Wang a chance to defend himself. Prosecutor-General
Huang Shih-ming (黃世銘) reported the case to Ma on Aug. 31, and Wang went abroad
on Sept. 6. Soon after Wang boarded the plane, Huang convened the press
conference. Ma had approved Wang’s leave request long before that, so he knew
perfectly well that Wang was going to host his daughter’s wedding on an island
in Malaysia and would not be able to return ahead of schedule.
That did not stop Ma from telling Wang to quickly return to Taiwan to explain
what had happened. The point was to create the impression that Wang felt guilty
and did not dare to come back and face the music. Knowing that Wang was
returning on Tuesday, Ma arranged for the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT)
Disciplinary Committee to convene and discuss Wang’s case on Wednesday morning,
giving Wang little chance to prepare a defense.
The Disciplinary Committee did not inform Wang about this meeting until 11pm on
Tuesday, so all he had time to do was write a statement. Before the meeting, Ma
held a press conference at which he called on the committee to at least cancel
Wang’s party membership, and he was in attendance to see it done. Ma wants Wang
out of the KMT, so it was obvious what the decision would be.
Ma keeps talking about upholding due process, but this episode has been all
about what Ma wants, with no regard for procedural justice and no reasonable
opportunity for Wang to answer the accusations made against him.
From a constitutional point of view, when a president decides to purge the
speaker of a nation’s legislature, it is a case of the overseen overthrowing the
overseer. Only a dictator treats the leader of the body delegated by the
Constitution to represent public opinion in this manner.
Compare Wang’s treatment with the trial of former Chinese Communist Party
secretary of Chongqing Bo Xilai (薄熙來). Although the prosecution had a full range
of witness and material evidence against him, China still permitted Bo’s trial
to be publicly broadcast via the Internet and let Bo prepare, stand in court and
speak in his defense.
In contrast, Ma has kicked disobedient legislative speaker Wang out without
giving him the chance of a fair trial. Who would have thought Taiwan’s democracy
and legal system could fall so low that even China’s looks better in comparison?
|
