The Wild Strawberry were interviewed by Houston's FM 90.1, KPFT, the Pacific Network, during the Human Rights Show sponsored by the Amnesty International. Please go to the following web site to listen to the interview:
http://archive.kpft.org/mp3/090116_190000hr.MP3
http://archive.kpft.org/
In the row "The Human Rights Show" for "Friday January 16, 2009 7:00 pm
Showing posts with label news. Show all posts
Showing posts with label news. Show all posts
11 Dec 2008
Three hours after Human Rights Day, Tibetans and Wild Strawberries were forced away from "Liberty" Square
1211 3:30 a.m. Tibetans were forced to leave. The policemen sent all the Tibetans away by three police patrol cars; then turned to WS. Within 1.5 hour, the policemen destroyed all the houses and Strawberries tower and lifted students away brutally. Approx. 30 Wild Strawberries were moved away (like a piece of meat or some inanimate stuff) by more than 200 policemen with nightsticks and shield. Please tell me, why at night? At deep sleepy night, at 3:30?? Three hours after Human Rights Day? Are they thief? Why to force Tibetans away? They were already homeless refugees. Some of them could not even speak Mandarin. They were sent and abandoned in six different corners in Taipei. Why illegal? Did those policemen know that the law they use had already announced a violation of Constitution Law? And it is going to be revised soon in the Legislative Yuan. Who is illegal? When students ask them to sign the "disagreement with the administration decision" according to article 29 in Police Law, they refused. Do they really read the law before they became a police???
10 Dec 2008
[The Huffington Post] Wild Strawberries: Taiwanese Student Movement Stirs Anew
Taipei, Taiwan - A defiant, peaceful march by 5,000 protesters to the grounds of the Presidential Palace yesterday marked the first month's anniversary of a renewed and re-invigorated national pro-democracy student movement.
The protesters, some wearing mocking costumes of former emperors and current mainland Chinese Communist officials, demanded that the current Taiwanese government of President Ma Ying-jeou abolish a law that requires protesters to see and obtain prior permission for all public protests. They made their point by merely notifying local officials of the march but not waiting for approval.
Along the route they were briefly warned and stopped by Taiwanese security officials but without incident. The march was punctuated with a mock funeral for human rights, just two days before celebration of International Human Rights Day.(Read More)
The protesters, some wearing mocking costumes of former emperors and current mainland Chinese Communist officials, demanded that the current Taiwanese government of President Ma Ying-jeou abolish a law that requires protesters to see and obtain prior permission for all public protests. They made their point by merely notifying local officials of the march but not waiting for approval.
Along the route they were briefly warned and stopped by Taiwanese security officials but without incident. The march was punctuated with a mock funeral for human rights, just two days before celebration of International Human Rights Day.(Read More)
6 Dec 2008
[Taiwan News] Taiwan ex-President Lee Teng-huei visits Wild Strawberry Movement protesters
TAIPEI (Taiwan News) – Former president Lee Teng-huei (李登輝) today visited Wild Strawberry Movement students at Liberty Square and promised to provide assistance to protesters with their demand to amend the Parade and Assembly Law.
Lee originally planned to visit the students Sunday on the Movement’s one-month anniversary but advanced his visit for a conflicting schedule. He told the students to take care of themselves amidst the cold weather and cheered for the demonstration to be staged tomorrow.
Lee said he agreed on the movement’s law amendment demand. The true essence of democracy lies in “power of the people”, said Lee, and government should not ask a demonstration to be held followed by application, but only to dispatch the police when violence occurred. (Read more)
Lee originally planned to visit the students Sunday on the Movement’s one-month anniversary but advanced his visit for a conflicting schedule. He told the students to take care of themselves amidst the cold weather and cheered for the demonstration to be staged tomorrow.
Lee said he agreed on the movement’s law amendment demand. The true essence of democracy lies in “power of the people”, said Lee, and government should not ask a demonstration to be held followed by application, but only to dispatch the police when violence occurred. (Read more)
2 Dec 2008
"Shame on Government - Walk out Back Door"--Two protest stuents were captured by more than 20 police officiers
On December, 1st, 2008, Zhen Zhe-Xiou(鄭哲修) and Su Hung-Rung(蘇紘融), two of students in Wild Strawberries Movement (WSM), took peaceful and grave actions to accuse of the Taiwan government which had not ever responded directly to the three WSM appeals. Zhen(鄭哲修) studied in the Department of Mathematics at the National Taiwan University and Su (蘇紘融) studied in the Department of Educational Psychology and Counseling at the National Taiwan Normal University. These two students considered that the people, who refused to take political responsibility for limiting the freedom of speech and harming human rights during the Chen Yun-Lin's (陳 雲林) visit, were unworthy of crossing through the main entrance. Therefore, at 8:30 A.M on December, 1st, these two students silently laid at the main entrance of the Executive Yuan for protesting. Because they considered that the Executive Yuan rejected to hear Taiwanese people's voice and could not provide sound and suitable explanation to what Executive Yuan violated and overruled during the Chen's visit, they only could "silently laid" to express their anger.
WSM always held peace, rationality, and non-violence from the beginning. Zhen(鄭哲修) and Su(蘇紘融) only could actively take actions to let the Taiwan government perceive when the government was blind to the occurrence of human rights violations in Taiwan. Indeed, these two students' action was the best practice of the non-violent resistance.
However, in the beginning five minutes of Zhen(鄭哲修) and Su(蘇紘融)'s action, policemen/policewomen immediately warned their silent-lay. After two warns, these two students advocated, "Shame on government! Walk out back door!" and "No government apology for its illegal actions. Human rights lay and die in Executive Yuan." Under the circumstance of twenty policemen/policewomen surrounding, they were lifted into the police car and were taken for further investigation in the police department of the Zhongzheng First Police District, Taipei City . At last, this silent-lay protest only continued for ten minutes.
When knowing Zhen(鄭哲修) and Su(蘇紘融) were taken for further investigation in the police station, the WSM students instantly informed of and sought assistance for the Lawyer Lin (林峰正) of Judicial Reform Foundation. During the investigation, the police indicated that Zhen(鄭哲修) and Su(蘇紘融) violated The Social Order Maintenance Law Aritcle 68. item 2(第68條第2款). These two students kept silent, were unwilling to cooperate with the police's inquest, and refused to sign up the deposition record by policemen/policewomen. Ultimately, Zhen(鄭哲修) and Su(蘇紘融) left the police station accompanied with the Lawyer Lin (林峰正).
WSM completely supports Zhen(鄭哲修) and Su(蘇紘融)'s silent-lay action. WSM believes that they held the resolution for nonviolent resistance to confront potential national violence and their action was full of courage. In addition, WSM respects that the police administered the law. However, these two students have already taken legal responsibility which they probably have to face. The police administered its power based on The Social Order Maintenance Law Article 68. item 2(第68條第2款): the person who creates troubles for inhabitants, factories, companies, public places, and locations for public pass. WSM wants to ask. The entrance of the Executive Yuan is not only one. Zhen(鄭哲修) and Su(蘇紘融) did not obstacle entire traffic lanes and block any cars' passing. As a result, what kinds of troubles which these two student created break the harmony at the main entrance of the Executive Yuan?
In the past, there are some stories regarding the common people stating and pleading by stopping the officers sitting in sedan chair. Why do the common people, even two students, have no opportunity to express and protest at the main entrance of the Executive Yuan, particularly in this democratic Taiwan society? For tackling these two students of WSM, it is incredible that the Executive Yuan arranged twenty to thirty policemen/policewomen to surround two students and forcefully lift them away. Does this action represent the scholar leadership of Liou (Former president of NCTU)？ If the government views the common people as the condemnable folks, one day, finally the people will spurn this government.
30 Nov 2008
[Taipei Times] Wild Strawberries plan rally without police permit
“Three weeks have passed [since we began demonstrating]. Our government has not shown any remorse but endorsed the use of excessive force by police,” Wild Strawberries spokesman Lo Shih-hsiang (羅士翔) said. “We are going to take this to the streets, to the Executive Yuan, the Legislative Yuan and the Presidential Office. We will step up together and show the government we will never stop defending human rights.”
Highlights of the rally on Ketagalan Boulevard will include a mock funeral procession to mourn the demise of human rights, Hsu said.
Students from Kaohsiung will carry a 2m bamboo puppet of Ma dressed in a military uniform to symbolize his “returning Taiwan to authoritarian rule,” said Yao Liang-yi (姚量議), a student from Kaohsiung.
Hsu said the public was welcome to join the rally, but that the movement would not tolerate violence or interference by any political parties.
“The tone of the movement has been non-violent and peaceful,” Hsu said, adding that students will ask that people remove any political symbols before joining the rally. (Full Text)
Highlights of the rally on Ketagalan Boulevard will include a mock funeral procession to mourn the demise of human rights, Hsu said.
Students from Kaohsiung will carry a 2m bamboo puppet of Ma dressed in a military uniform to symbolize his “returning Taiwan to authoritarian rule,” said Yao Liang-yi (姚量議), a student from Kaohsiung.
Hsu said the public was welcome to join the rally, but that the movement would not tolerate violence or interference by any political parties.
“The tone of the movement has been non-violent and peaceful,” Hsu said, adding that students will ask that people remove any political symbols before joining the rally. (Full Text)
28 Nov 2008
"Named must your fear be before banish it you can."--Democracy in Danger: No Military on campus.
“Named must your fear be before banish it you can.”
As Master Yoda said:
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2008/11/28/2003429730 (correct link)
While people finally demonstrate against the parade and assembly law (years to late), they should recognize military instructors in schools and universities as a much bigger danger for democracy.
I visited a number of Schools and universities in my life. None of them needed any military instructors to guarantee safety on campus. I did not even know that safety in a school or University is something to worry about.
Actually in the countries I went to school and University a military instructor would be considered to be a mayor security risk and a danger for freedom and democracy.
Why a military instructor has any qualifications in counselling seems to be a hidden secrete. Usually people would hire a PhD in Psychology for such a difficult job.
So why are this guys needed? What purpose do they full fill and who controls them? Who controls the army in general?
There can only one constitution and one law in a country and its army must be under this system and not beside or above.
The first principle in a modern army in a democratic country must be to safe and honour this democracy.
Drill and discipline is necessary to make an army able to operate, but someone should not understand it as a training just to blindly follow commands (that would be fascism), but as a training to make responsible decisions under pressure, responsible in the light of ethics and constitution.
Military instructors are the opposite of what is needed. They make the society a part of the army.
In a democracy the army must be part of the society. So civil instructors would be needed in the army to teach soldiers and especially young officers the fundaments of a democratic society and the ethics they need to make decisions in a responsible way. These instructors should be independent of political influence, for example a priest or a monk or a professor of law or history or politics, …
To abolish military instructors immediately is a conditio sine qua non for a country that is even thinking about to use the word democracy to describe its political system.
As there are rumours that military instructors work as spies for the government to collect information’s about students active in the protests, it might be the time for a counter strike and photograph and identify the military instructors, as they are one of the main enemies of democracy.
They must be named to be banished.
As Master Yoda said:
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2008/11/28/2003429730 (correct link)
While people finally demonstrate against the parade and assembly law (years to late), they should recognize military instructors in schools and universities as a much bigger danger for democracy.
I visited a number of Schools and universities in my life. None of them needed any military instructors to guarantee safety on campus. I did not even know that safety in a school or University is something to worry about.
Actually in the countries I went to school and University a military instructor would be considered to be a mayor security risk and a danger for freedom and democracy.
Why a military instructor has any qualifications in counselling seems to be a hidden secrete. Usually people would hire a PhD in Psychology for such a difficult job.
So why are this guys needed? What purpose do they full fill and who controls them? Who controls the army in general?
There can only one constitution and one law in a country and its army must be under this system and not beside or above.
The first principle in a modern army in a democratic country must be to safe and honour this democracy.
Drill and discipline is necessary to make an army able to operate, but someone should not understand it as a training just to blindly follow commands (that would be fascism), but as a training to make responsible decisions under pressure, responsible in the light of ethics and constitution.
Military instructors are the opposite of what is needed. They make the society a part of the army.
In a democracy the army must be part of the society. So civil instructors would be needed in the army to teach soldiers and especially young officers the fundaments of a democratic society and the ethics they need to make decisions in a responsible way. These instructors should be independent of political influence, for example a priest or a monk or a professor of law or history or politics, …
To abolish military instructors immediately is a conditio sine qua non for a country that is even thinking about to use the word democracy to describe its political system.
As there are rumours that military instructors work as spies for the government to collect information’s about students active in the protests, it might be the time for a counter strike and photograph and identify the military instructors, as they are one of the main enemies of democracy.
They must be named to be banished.
19 Nov 2008
Nov 18th Press Release from the Wild Strawberries Movement
The Executive Yuan has raised the issue of revisions to the Parade and Assembly Law recently. However, the new version adopts a “compulsory registration system” whose content preserves restrictions including “assembling without registration is illegal”, “establishing forbidden areas”, “police have the right to alter the time, place, and form of the parade”, “the police can command dissolution of the parade without explicit standards”, and “the criminal and administrative sanctions relating to assembly”. Namely, the revision contains no practical improvements, only the change of name from “permission” to “registration”.
The Wild Strawberries question the statements President Ma made few days ago. What did he imply about the “registration system”? Is it compulsory or voluntary? Or is it that President Ma cannot distinguish between these two completely different systems?
The Wild Strawberries Movement cannot accept the revision. Initially, all the revisions proposed by KMT legislators Chu Feng-tz (朱鳳芝) and Cheng Li-wen (鄭麗文), as well as members of the DPP, were aimed at a voluntary registration system, but these were dropped from the final revisions. The Wild Strawberries urge both parties to support a voluntary registration system.
The Internal Affairs Committee of the Legislative Yuan will draw up modifications of the Parade and Assembly Law on November 19th. In order to supervise the Legislative Yuan’s procedures, the Taiwan Association for Human Rights will hold a large assembly at 8:45 am tomorrow in front of Legislative Yuan (No.1, Chungshan S. Rd). They intend to besiege the Legislative Yuan, and make a detour each hour. Further, there will be a farewell ceremony for the Assembly and Parade Law on 10 o’clock. The activity is expected to be held for at least half, if not the whole day, and the students involved in the Wild Strawberries Movement will come out to support this activity.
The Wild Strawberries want to stress that they never raise funds outside of Liberty Square (自由廣場), for there have been individuals going around Taipei raising money pretending to be Wild Strawberries. Please do not give money to anyone outside of the Liberty Square Demonstration.
The Wild Strawberries question the statements President Ma made few days ago. What did he imply about the “registration system”? Is it compulsory or voluntary? Or is it that President Ma cannot distinguish between these two completely different systems?
The Wild Strawberries Movement cannot accept the revision. Initially, all the revisions proposed by KMT legislators Chu Feng-tz (朱鳳芝) and Cheng Li-wen (鄭麗文), as well as members of the DPP, were aimed at a voluntary registration system, but these were dropped from the final revisions. The Wild Strawberries urge both parties to support a voluntary registration system.
The Internal Affairs Committee of the Legislative Yuan will draw up modifications of the Parade and Assembly Law on November 19th. In order to supervise the Legislative Yuan’s procedures, the Taiwan Association for Human Rights will hold a large assembly at 8:45 am tomorrow in front of Legislative Yuan (No.1, Chungshan S. Rd). They intend to besiege the Legislative Yuan, and make a detour each hour. Further, there will be a farewell ceremony for the Assembly and Parade Law on 10 o’clock. The activity is expected to be held for at least half, if not the whole day, and the students involved in the Wild Strawberries Movement will come out to support this activity.
The Wild Strawberries want to stress that they never raise funds outside of Liberty Square (自由廣場), for there have been individuals going around Taipei raising money pretending to be Wild Strawberries. Please do not give money to anyone outside of the Liberty Square Demonstration.
[Taipei Times] Oct 27 Hunger strike continues at the Legislative Yuan
By Flora Wang STAFF REPORTER Monday, Oct 27, 2008, Page 3
Several pro-localization activists led by the Taiwan Association of University Professors (TAUP) continued their hunger strike in front of the legislature yesterday.
Wearing black T-shirts with the slogans “Taiwan is my country” and “Love Made in Taiwan,” the protesters are demanding an amendment to the Referendum Law (公投法).
The law, enacted by the Chinese Nationalist Party-dominated (KMT) legislature in 2003, stipulates that the number of signatures required for a referendum proposal to be reviewed is 0.5 percent of the voters who participated in the most recent presidential election — or approximately 80,000 individuals — with an additional 5 percent signatures from the population needed for a referendum to be held.
The law has long been criticized by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) as a “bird cage” law. The DPP has made several attempts to have the law amended over the past several years, but its proposals never clear the legislative floor.
The protesters began the hunger strike after participating in the opposition rally on Ketagalan Boulevard on Saturday. They have remained in front of the legislature since, with posters written in Chinese, Japanese and English demanding an amendment to the Referendum Law.
“I’m protesting against the Legislative Yuan by staging a hunger strike,” TAUP chairman Tsai Ting-kuei (蔡丁貴) said. “I will stay here until the law is amended.”
Tsai called for changes to the high thresholds stipulated in the law for a referendum to be passed.
A participant at the hunger strike surnamed Chueh (闕) said that everyone in Taiwan should stand up and oppose the KMT administration’s pro-China policy, saying it was “a matter of life and death.” (Original Page)
Several pro-localization activists led by the Taiwan Association of University Professors (TAUP) continued their hunger strike in front of the legislature yesterday.
Wearing black T-shirts with the slogans “Taiwan is my country” and “Love Made in Taiwan,” the protesters are demanding an amendment to the Referendum Law (公投法).
The law, enacted by the Chinese Nationalist Party-dominated (KMT) legislature in 2003, stipulates that the number of signatures required for a referendum proposal to be reviewed is 0.5 percent of the voters who participated in the most recent presidential election — or approximately 80,000 individuals — with an additional 5 percent signatures from the population needed for a referendum to be held.
The law has long been criticized by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) as a “bird cage” law. The DPP has made several attempts to have the law amended over the past several years, but its proposals never clear the legislative floor.
The protesters began the hunger strike after participating in the opposition rally on Ketagalan Boulevard on Saturday. They have remained in front of the legislature since, with posters written in Chinese, Japanese and English demanding an amendment to the Referendum Law.
“I’m protesting against the Legislative Yuan by staging a hunger strike,” TAUP chairman Tsai Ting-kuei (蔡丁貴) said. “I will stay here until the law is amended.”
Tsai called for changes to the high thresholds stipulated in the law for a referendum to be passed.
A participant at the hunger strike surnamed Chueh (闕) said that everyone in Taiwan should stand up and oppose the KMT administration’s pro-China policy, saying it was “a matter of life and death.” (Original Page)
16 Nov 2008
[Taipei Times] A movement away from the political orthodoxy
A group of students and academics linked up via the Internet to launch a silent vigil, one quite different in form and purpose from the noisy mobilizations of the blue and green parties.
Their goals are very simple: Criticize police for acting outside their authority and infringing on freedom of speech in the name of security; demand that the government admit to and apologize for its errors; and call for amendments to the Assembly and Parade Law (集會遊行法) where the law conflicts with freedom of expression.
The students are straightforward, sincere and deserve to be taken seriously. These are people who originally gave politics the cold shoulder and who are sick and tired of the endless war of words between pro-unification and pro-independence forces. During the overextension of police authority during Chen’s visit, the students saw the ugly face of the abuse of government power. They saw how the police were selective in approving applications for assembly, how they banned the display of the Republic of China flag in specified areas, how they gratuitously marched into a record shop and ordered the management to stop playing certain music.
To the protesters, all of these actions exceeded the boundaries of law enforcement.
The protesters’ agenda indicates that a new generation has appeared with its own way of thinking. The axis of political debate in Taiwan may gradually move away from the struggle between unification and independence forces, which the younger generation finds meaningless, toward a fight for deeper democracy and civil liberties.
Politicians should recognize the sincerity of this movement instead of smearing it. Any party that fails to recognize the shift that is taking place risks being sidelined and swept away. (Full Text)
Their goals are very simple: Criticize police for acting outside their authority and infringing on freedom of speech in the name of security; demand that the government admit to and apologize for its errors; and call for amendments to the Assembly and Parade Law (集會遊行法) where the law conflicts with freedom of expression.
The students are straightforward, sincere and deserve to be taken seriously. These are people who originally gave politics the cold shoulder and who are sick and tired of the endless war of words between pro-unification and pro-independence forces. During the overextension of police authority during Chen’s visit, the students saw the ugly face of the abuse of government power. They saw how the police were selective in approving applications for assembly, how they banned the display of the Republic of China flag in specified areas, how they gratuitously marched into a record shop and ordered the management to stop playing certain music.
To the protesters, all of these actions exceeded the boundaries of law enforcement.
The protesters’ agenda indicates that a new generation has appeared with its own way of thinking. The axis of political debate in Taiwan may gradually move away from the struggle between unification and independence forces, which the younger generation finds meaningless, toward a fight for deeper democracy and civil liberties.
Politicians should recognize the sincerity of this movement instead of smearing it. Any party that fails to recognize the shift that is taking place risks being sidelined and swept away. (Full Text)
[Taipei Times] Wild Strawberries call for probes
YOUTH GONE WILD: The demonstrators asked the government which article authorizes the police to stop people from waving Taiwan’s flag, but not China’s flag
By Flora Wang
Friday, Nov 14, 2008, Page 4
Students yesterday perform a skit during a sit-in protest at the National Taiwan Democracy Memorial Hall, demanding that the government amend the Assembly and Parade Law.
In an on-line statement on the students’ Web blog (action1106.blogspot.com) yesterday, the students urged the government to explain to the public specifically which law authorized the police to prevent people from waving Taiwan’s national flag, but allowed people to hold China’s national flag during demonstrations for and against the visit by Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait Chairman Chen Yunlin (陳雲林) last week.
The students also urged the government to clarify to the public whether all police officers involved in the security measures last week carried out their duties in accordance with normal administrative procedures and urged the authorities to reflect on whether their measures had been excessive.
The students have been staging silent sit-ins nationwide, protesting what they call excessive police force during Chen’s five-day stay.
They are demanding an apology from President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and Premier Liu Chao-shiuan (劉兆玄) and the resignation of National Police Agency Director-General Wang Cho-chun (王卓鈞) and National Security Bureau Director-General Tsai Chao-ming (蔡朝明).
Also on the students’ agenda is an immediate amendment to the Assembly and Parade Law (集會遊行法), which currently obliges event organizers to gain police approval before holding rallies.
On their Web blog, the students have included numerous hyperlinks to video clips showing police security measures last week, including one that showed a plainclothes police officer telling a person videotaping the protest at Zhongshan Bridge to immediately leave “or I will ask a member of the Special Weapons And Tactics [SWAT] team to arrest you.”
“We can see that the law enforcement authorities assigned police officers a mission to complete and that police officers would rather excessively limit or even violate people’s basic human rights in a bid to save their own jobs,” the student protesters’ statement said, adding that the police had violated people’s constitutional rights by resorting to force against those who did not pose an obvious and immediate threat to Chen.
The students also shrugged off Ma’s comments on Wednesday that excessive use of police force had only occurred in isolated cases.
“These illegal and unconstitutional incidents and violations of human rights took place because the government expanded the scale of law enforcement during Chen’s stay in Taiwan,” student movement spokesman Lee Li-wei (李立偉) said.
Meanwhile, Lee called on teachers and students who supported the movement to gather and broaden the scale of the sit-in at Liberty Square, outside the Taiwan Democracy Memorial Hall tomorrow.
Lee said about 50 students from Hong Kong Polytechnic University would launch a sit-in at their school in support of the movement today.
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2008/11/14/2003428559
By Flora Wang
Friday, Nov 14, 2008, Page 4
Students yesterday perform a skit during a sit-in protest at the National Taiwan Democracy Memorial Hall, demanding that the government amend the Assembly and Parade Law.
In an on-line statement on the students’ Web blog (action1106.blogspot.com) yesterday, the students urged the government to explain to the public specifically which law authorized the police to prevent people from waving Taiwan’s national flag, but allowed people to hold China’s national flag during demonstrations for and against the visit by Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait Chairman Chen Yunlin (陳雲林) last week.
The students also urged the government to clarify to the public whether all police officers involved in the security measures last week carried out their duties in accordance with normal administrative procedures and urged the authorities to reflect on whether their measures had been excessive.
The students have been staging silent sit-ins nationwide, protesting what they call excessive police force during Chen’s five-day stay.
They are demanding an apology from President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and Premier Liu Chao-shiuan (劉兆玄) and the resignation of National Police Agency Director-General Wang Cho-chun (王卓鈞) and National Security Bureau Director-General Tsai Chao-ming (蔡朝明).
Also on the students’ agenda is an immediate amendment to the Assembly and Parade Law (集會遊行法), which currently obliges event organizers to gain police approval before holding rallies.
On their Web blog, the students have included numerous hyperlinks to video clips showing police security measures last week, including one that showed a plainclothes police officer telling a person videotaping the protest at Zhongshan Bridge to immediately leave “or I will ask a member of the Special Weapons And Tactics [SWAT] team to arrest you.”
“We can see that the law enforcement authorities assigned police officers a mission to complete and that police officers would rather excessively limit or even violate people’s basic human rights in a bid to save their own jobs,” the student protesters’ statement said, adding that the police had violated people’s constitutional rights by resorting to force against those who did not pose an obvious and immediate threat to Chen.
The students also shrugged off Ma’s comments on Wednesday that excessive use of police force had only occurred in isolated cases.
“These illegal and unconstitutional incidents and violations of human rights took place because the government expanded the scale of law enforcement during Chen’s stay in Taiwan,” student movement spokesman Lee Li-wei (李立偉) said.
Meanwhile, Lee called on teachers and students who supported the movement to gather and broaden the scale of the sit-in at Liberty Square, outside the Taiwan Democracy Memorial Hall tomorrow.
Lee said about 50 students from Hong Kong Polytechnic University would launch a sit-in at their school in support of the movement today.
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2008/11/14/2003428559
[Taipei Times] Sit-in: A lesson in preserving democracy
By Lin Huan-yi 林奐怡
Wednesday, Nov 12, 2008, Page 8
When I searched for Songs of Taiwan (台灣之歌) on YouTube recently, I was stunned by what I saw. I could hardly believe that what I found was really the Taiwan I know. I support communication between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait, but when the national dignity and freedom of speech that we are so proud of are trampled like this, how can one not feel pain? I was moved to voice my discontent with the government.
I learned about the “Operation Seige” protest against Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait Chairman Chen Yunlin (陳雲林) from the newspapers. Despite the chance that I would be labeled a supporter of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) if I joined the protest, I still went.
However, once there all I heard and saw was nationalistic shouting and confrontations, with demonstrators egged on by politicians delivering sensational and theatrical speeches. This did not reflect why I was participating. I am unwilling to downgrade myself and become a tool in the hands of politicians. Besides, I felt that the protests were not aimed at achieving social justice as I had expected, so I quietly left and went home.
After I got home, I went online and learned that a sit-in petition organized by Lee Ming-tsung (李明璁), an assistant professor in the Department of Sociology at National Taiwan University, had already attracted much attention on PTT2, which is one of Taiwan’s biggest bulletin board systems. After reading the posts carefully, I felt that the protest dovetailed with my pursuit of social justice and resolved to join the sit-in.
Later in the evening on Friday, protesters were expelled from the site of the sit-in near the Legislative Yuan. Hundreds of teachers and students, including myself, were bundled into police vans and dropped off at different locations around town. However, it was not long before we made our way back downtown and gathered again, this time at the National Taiwan Democracy Memorial Hall.
This is a living lesson in democracy. I talked to a teacher who said that democracy does not appear by itself and is often a result of street movements. Sadly, the democracy that results from such street movements is often destroyed by those in power. The concept of civil disobedience did not appear in my school textbooks, but I have now learned about it firsthand. I have also witnessed how the media sensationalize and distort simple appeals for human rights.
The pursuit of social justice must go beyond political camps. Take my schoolmate, for example: She took part in the “red shirt” campaign against former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), but she is also participating in the sit-in protest this time. To which camp or party does she belong, then?
Unfortunately, Taiwan is still trapped in a blue-green dichotomy. Why should students be labeled as one or the other when expressing discontent with the government? Does this also mean students are deprived of their right to discuss public issues? This is ridiculously unfair and should never happen.
On Saturday, I sat in the rain all day under the cover of a wide-brimmed farmer’s hat. Despite the miserable weather, I felt fortunate to participate in the student movement and I am certainly proud of the teachers and students who sat in the rain with me. We are safeguarding the universal values of human rights and democracy through a peaceful and rational process.
Lin Huan-yi is a student in the Department of Graphic Arts Communication at National Taiwan Normal University.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/editorials/archives/2008/11/12/2003428379
Wednesday, Nov 12, 2008, Page 8
When I searched for Songs of Taiwan (台灣之歌) on YouTube recently, I was stunned by what I saw. I could hardly believe that what I found was really the Taiwan I know. I support communication between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait, but when the national dignity and freedom of speech that we are so proud of are trampled like this, how can one not feel pain? I was moved to voice my discontent with the government.
I learned about the “Operation Seige” protest against Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait Chairman Chen Yunlin (陳雲林) from the newspapers. Despite the chance that I would be labeled a supporter of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) if I joined the protest, I still went.
However, once there all I heard and saw was nationalistic shouting and confrontations, with demonstrators egged on by politicians delivering sensational and theatrical speeches. This did not reflect why I was participating. I am unwilling to downgrade myself and become a tool in the hands of politicians. Besides, I felt that the protests were not aimed at achieving social justice as I had expected, so I quietly left and went home.
After I got home, I went online and learned that a sit-in petition organized by Lee Ming-tsung (李明璁), an assistant professor in the Department of Sociology at National Taiwan University, had already attracted much attention on PTT2, which is one of Taiwan’s biggest bulletin board systems. After reading the posts carefully, I felt that the protest dovetailed with my pursuit of social justice and resolved to join the sit-in.
Later in the evening on Friday, protesters were expelled from the site of the sit-in near the Legislative Yuan. Hundreds of teachers and students, including myself, were bundled into police vans and dropped off at different locations around town. However, it was not long before we made our way back downtown and gathered again, this time at the National Taiwan Democracy Memorial Hall.
This is a living lesson in democracy. I talked to a teacher who said that democracy does not appear by itself and is often a result of street movements. Sadly, the democracy that results from such street movements is often destroyed by those in power. The concept of civil disobedience did not appear in my school textbooks, but I have now learned about it firsthand. I have also witnessed how the media sensationalize and distort simple appeals for human rights.
The pursuit of social justice must go beyond political camps. Take my schoolmate, for example: She took part in the “red shirt” campaign against former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), but she is also participating in the sit-in protest this time. To which camp or party does she belong, then?
Unfortunately, Taiwan is still trapped in a blue-green dichotomy. Why should students be labeled as one or the other when expressing discontent with the government? Does this also mean students are deprived of their right to discuss public issues? This is ridiculously unfair and should never happen.
On Saturday, I sat in the rain all day under the cover of a wide-brimmed farmer’s hat. Despite the miserable weather, I felt fortunate to participate in the student movement and I am certainly proud of the teachers and students who sat in the rain with me. We are safeguarding the universal values of human rights and democracy through a peaceful and rational process.
Lin Huan-yi is a student in the Department of Graphic Arts Communication at National Taiwan Normal University.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/editorials/archives/2008/11/12/2003428379
[Taipei Times] Students reconvene, protest on
ROUND TWO: Although demonstrators were evicted on Friday, many returned to continue their sit-in, demanding an apology for how police handled last week’s protests
By Lin Chia-chi
STAFF REPORTER, WITH STAFF WRITER
Sunday, Nov 09, 2008, Page 1
A protester winces as rain beats down on him at National Taiwan Democracy Memorial Hall in downtown Taipei yesterday. Hundreds of college students have taken part in a sit-in protest against heavy-handed policing of recent demonstrations.
PHOTO: LO PEI-DER, TAIPEI TIMES
“We want human rights!” chanted students at National Taiwan Democracy Memorial Hall as they continued their sit-in for a third day, demanding an apology from the government over what they called the “rough” tactics used by police to deal with protesters during the visit by China’s Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait Chaiman Chen Yunlin (陳雲林) last week.
Despite the poor weather yesterday, more than 100 students wore simple raincoats and remained sitting in protest in the Taipei rain. (More)
By Lin Chia-chi
STAFF REPORTER, WITH STAFF WRITER
Sunday, Nov 09, 2008, Page 1
A protester winces as rain beats down on him at National Taiwan Democracy Memorial Hall in downtown Taipei yesterday. Hundreds of college students have taken part in a sit-in protest against heavy-handed policing of recent demonstrations.
PHOTO: LO PEI-DER, TAIPEI TIMES
“We want human rights!” chanted students at National Taiwan Democracy Memorial Hall as they continued their sit-in for a third day, demanding an apology from the government over what they called the “rough” tactics used by police to deal with protesters during the visit by China’s Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait Chaiman Chen Yunlin (陳雲林) last week.
Despite the poor weather yesterday, more than 100 students wore simple raincoats and remained sitting in protest in the Taipei rain. (More)
15 Nov 2008
[China Post] Students to expand sit-in protest today
Updated Saturday, November 15, 2008 10:20 am TWN, CNA
TAIPEI, Taiwan -- The organizers of a recently established student movement pushing for reform of Taiwan’s assembly law announced yesterday their plan to expand their ongoing sit-in protest.
According to Lin Yu-hsuan, spokesman for the Taiwan Wild Strawberries Movement, the sit-in, which has been held at Taipei’s Liberty Square since last Friday, will be expanded on Saturday and is expected to draw approximately 1,000 participants, including student representatives from Hsinchu, Taichung, Chiayi, Tainan and Kaohsiung.
The sit-in once saw around 500 students participate, but the number has dropped to below 100 over the past few days as many returned to school to sit for midterm exams.
Lin said the group does not rule out the possibility that politicians sympathizing with their cause may be invited to take part. They have previously banned non students from participating.
Lin said the group will continue their peaceful demonstration until their appeals are answered, with disregard for possible dispersal by the police.
Over the past week, the group of students has been staging the sit-in to protest against what they called the use of excessive force by police to disperse pro-independence demonstrators who protested against the recent visit to Taiwan by a Chinese envoy.
The envoy, Chen Yunlin, president of the Beijing-based Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Straits, is China’s top negotiator with Taiwan. He was in the country from Nov. 3-7 to sign four non-political pacts with his Taiwan counterpart Chiang Pin-kung, chairman of the Straits Exchange Foundation.
Some protesters, who feared the visit and agreements would jeopardize Taiwan’s independence and sovereignty, threw bottles and rocks at police and pushed down police barricades. Police responded by spraying water at the protesters, scuffling with some of them, and arresting others.
In addition to demanding an open apology from President Ma Ying-jeou and Premier Liu Chao-shiuan, the student group is also asking for the replacement of National Security Bureau Director General Tsai Chao-ming and National Police Agency Director-General Wang Cho-chiun.
Furthermore, the students want the Parade and Assembly Law be amended to relax its restrictions on people’s right to demonstrate. Protesters had complained their application to protest in many areas were rejected. Ma said in a radio interview Wednesday that Minister of the Interior Liao Liou-yi has on many occasions apologized over the alleged misconduct by law-enforcement officers and promised to review the methods adopted by the police in performing their duties.
Ma admitted there was room for improvement in the performance of Tsai and Wang in handling the demonstrations, but said “this was not to an extent where they should be removed from their posts.”
The president said the legislative caucus of the ruling Kuomintang will hold a public hearing to discuss a possible amendment to the Parade and Assembly law, with representatives of the protesting students to be invited to express their opinions at the hearing.
http://www.chinapost.com.tw/taiwan/2008/11/15/183266/Students-to.htm
[Taipei Times] Strawberries returning to sit-in protest
GROWING: A spokesman for the student movement said that the sit-in protest was expected to draw about 1,000 participants from around the nation today
STAFF WRITER, WITH CNA
Saturday, Nov 15, 2008, Page 4
The organizers of a recently established student movement pushing for reform of the Assembly and Parade Law (集會遊行法) announced yesterday a plan to expand the sit-in protest.
Lin Yu-hsuan (林邑軒), spokesman for the Taiwan Wild Strawberries Movement, said the week-long sit-in at Taipei’s Liberty Square would be expanded today and was expected to draw approximately 1,000 participants, including student representatives from Hsinchu, Taichung, Chiayi, Tainan and Kaohsiung.
The sit-in earlier saw around 500 students participate, but the number has dropped to below 100 over the past few days as many returned to school for mid-term exams.
Lin said the group did not rule out the possibility that politicians sympathizing with their cause may be invited to take part. They had previously banned non-students from participating.
Lin said the group would continue their peaceful demonstration until their appeals were answered, disregarding possible dispersal by the police.
Over the past week, the group of students has been staging the sit-in to protest what they called the use of excessive force by police to disperse pro-independence demonstrators during a recent visit to Taiwan by Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Straits Chairman Chen Yunlin (陳雲林).
In addition to demanding an apology from President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and Premier Liu Chao-shiuan (劉兆玄), the student group is also asking for the resignations of National Security Bureau Director-General Tsai Chao-ming (蔡朝明) and National Police Agency Director-General Wang Cho-chun (王卓鈞).
The students also want the assembly law to be amended to relax its restrictions on people’s right to demonstrate. Protesters had complained that their applications to protest were rejected in many areas.
In a radio interview on Wednesday, Ma said there was room for improvement in Tsai and Wang’s performance in handling the demonstrations, but added: “This was not to the extent that they should be removed from their posts.”
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2008/11/15/2003428655
STAFF WRITER, WITH CNA
Saturday, Nov 15, 2008, Page 4
The organizers of a recently established student movement pushing for reform of the Assembly and Parade Law (集會遊行法) announced yesterday a plan to expand the sit-in protest.
Lin Yu-hsuan (林邑軒), spokesman for the Taiwan Wild Strawberries Movement, said the week-long sit-in at Taipei’s Liberty Square would be expanded today and was expected to draw approximately 1,000 participants, including student representatives from Hsinchu, Taichung, Chiayi, Tainan and Kaohsiung.
The sit-in earlier saw around 500 students participate, but the number has dropped to below 100 over the past few days as many returned to school for mid-term exams.
Lin said the group did not rule out the possibility that politicians sympathizing with their cause may be invited to take part. They had previously banned non-students from participating.
Lin said the group would continue their peaceful demonstration until their appeals were answered, disregarding possible dispersal by the police.
Over the past week, the group of students has been staging the sit-in to protest what they called the use of excessive force by police to disperse pro-independence demonstrators during a recent visit to Taiwan by Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Straits Chairman Chen Yunlin (陳雲林).
In addition to demanding an apology from President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and Premier Liu Chao-shiuan (劉兆玄), the student group is also asking for the resignations of National Security Bureau Director-General Tsai Chao-ming (蔡朝明) and National Police Agency Director-General Wang Cho-chun (王卓鈞).
The students also want the assembly law to be amended to relax its restrictions on people’s right to demonstrate. Protesters had complained that their applications to protest were rejected in many areas.
In a radio interview on Wednesday, Ma said there was room for improvement in Tsai and Wang’s performance in handling the demonstrations, but added: “This was not to the extent that they should be removed from their posts.”
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2008/11/15/2003428655
14 Nov 2008
Ma: Two Officials Must Reflect, Not Step Down
By Wang Yu Chung, Peng Hsien Jun, Huang Duen Yien
Published: 11/13/2008 The Liberty Times
President Ma Ying-jeou responded officially for the first time yesterday to the Wild Strawberry Movement's demand that the National Police Agency Director-General Wang Cho-chiun and National Security Bureau Director Tsai Chao-ming step down. Ma said that their actions warrant an evaluation, but "do not warrant dismissals."
As for the students’ demand that President Ma and Premier Liu apologize for excessive law enforcement tactics used during the Chinese envoy’s visit, Ma pointed out that one must look at the larger picture. The agreements signed between the two sides and the atmosphere created laid the foundation for improved cross-straight relations and will be beneficial to Taiwan's international standing.
Ma indicated that police enforcement may have caused some unintentional injuries, citing a TV reporter’s case as an example. Minister of Interior Liao Liou-yi has apologized on several occasions and will assess law enforcement tactics. That said, recent police activities in maintaining public safety should be considered as a success.
The National Police Agency mentioned that accusations made by the Wild Strawberries Movement were turned over to the Taipei City Police Department Bureau for further investigation.
With regard to the student’s appeal to amend the Parade and Assembly Law from its current approval and permission requirement to allowing citizens to simply inform authorities of assembly plans is consistent with his position. He appreciates the students’ assistance in helping him realize his campaign promises.
However, Ma pointed out that recent polls indicated that there are varying opinions on amending the legislation as a result of the violence and bloody scenes from the November 6th rally. Changing the system does not imply that individuals may simply call the police immediately before staging demonstrations. For instance, Germany allows its citizens to inform authorities of demonstration plans ahead of time, but law enforcement reserves the right to reject such plans. Ma emphasized that a permit system may not necessarily be restrictive, while system of informing authorities may not be lax. The key issue is not about whether to inform authorities, but about violent activities.
Kuomintang’s Central Standing Committee also discussed revising the legislation. Party Chairman Wu Po-hsiung specifically called on the Democratic Progressive Party to dissociate itself with corruption and violence.
Furthermore, some KMT Central Standing Committee members proposed a visit to Liu Po-yen, a self-professed old KMT member who committed self-immolation two days ago. The KMT stated that Liu did not register in 2000 and is no longer a party member. He has switched political alignment [from pro-Blue to pro-Green] and has been consuming more DPP-friendly media content, making an official visit from the KMT unnecessary.
Translated from http://www.libertytimes.com.tw/2008/new/nov/13/today-p2.htm
[SCMP] Ties that blind--Improved cross-strait relations appear to have come at a cost to some civil liberties in Taiwan
Jerome Cohen (Former Supervisor of President Ma)
Updated on Nov 13, 2008
Last week's historic visit to Taiwan by Beijing's cross-strait chief, Chen Yunlin , which culminated in four useful agreements, focused attention on issues of human rights as well as politics. Some issues concerned the proper government response to public protests in a free society. Others involved fair investigation of former and present government leaders suspected of corruption.
Chinese have recognised the importance of protecting foreign envoys for almost 3,000 years. The feudal states that contended for power before establishment of the Qin dynasty reciprocally assured the personal safety of their emissaries. Such protection has continued to be indispensable to inter-state co-operation.
After police in Tainan failed to prevent an assault on Mr Chen's deputy, president Ma Ying-jeou's government was obligated to do better during Mr Chen's visit. Although police could not prevent Mr Chen from being trapped in a hotel for eight hours by a huge mob of protesters, they did defend him against bodily harm throughout a stressful week.
In doing so, they went beyond the limits of a free society, forbidding peaceful protesters from displaying Taiwanese and Tibetan flags, confiscating flags from demonstrators, closing a store that played Taiwanese songs and seeking to minimise the visitors' awareness of the protests. There were also incidents of police brutality, albeit sometimes in response to violent provocations by demonstrators.
The police misconduct even outraged many local supporters of Mr Chen's visit. Mr Ma, in addition to implementing his campaign pledge to sponsor revision of the Assembly and Parade Law to eliminate protesters' need for advance official permission, should recommend amendments prohibiting the kind of undemocratic police practices that recently occurred and order training designed to enhance police compliance with the law. It is encouraging to note that Democratic Progressive Party chairwoman Tsai Ing-wen, who led the massive opposition demonstration, has subsequently called not only for a government review of police misconduct but also for a re-examination by her own party of its failures to maintain order among its demonstrators. The DPP, if it is to fulfil its essential role as democratic opposition, must not degenerate into an army of street fighters.
Some Taiwanese and foreign critics took the occasion of Mr Chen's visit to call attention to another crucial feature of democratic government - the fair prosecution of current and former officials suspected of corruption. The critics voiced three serious complaints about recent arrests and incommunicado detentions of prominent DPP figures who have served as government officials. They imply that the DPP is being singled out for prosecutions while corruption among Kuomintang leaders is being ignored. They also claim that: most DPP suspects have been held incommunicado without a court examination of the justification for their detentions; and that prosecutors' offices have been leaking detrimental information about the suspects to the media while denying them knowledge of the leaks and a chance to refute the "trial by press".
These practices, it is said, bring into question the political neutrality of the judiciary, and the presumption of innocence and other elements of due process required for the fair and open trials essential to democracy, raising the spectre of the unjust procedures of "the dark days of martial law" (1947-1987). It is not clear whether critics' claims of "selective prosecution" are well founded. Recent arrests may simply reflect massive corruption by the DPP, which dominated executive government for the past eight years - corruption that allegedly reached as high as former president Chen Shui-bian and his family.
Oddly, although during the Chen administration some prosecutions were brought against both DPP and KMT figures, some obvious KMT targets were overlooked despite reportedly thick dossiers compiled by Control Yuan investigators. Mr Ma should appoint a commission of impartial experts to review such prosecutions.
It does not appear that any of the recently detained DPP figures were denied a court hearing or their right to counsel. Moreover, there is a legislative basis for the courts' decisions to detain them incommunicado for up to four months of investigation if there is a reasonable basis for believing that the suspects might otherwise falsify evidence. Yet, in view of the harshness of this pre-indictment sanction and the obstacles it creates to mounting an adequate defence, it ought to be invoked rarely.
Certainly, the Legislative Yuan, or the commission suggested here, should re-examine legislation to strike a new balance between the threat of corruption to a democratic government and the threat of incommunicado detention to civil liberty.
The charge of biased prosecution leaks to the press seems to be the most straightforward of the critics' complaints. Such leaks, which occur in many countries, do appear to have taken place and cannot be allowed in a democratic system.
Jerome A. Cohen is co-director of NYU's US-Asia Law Institute and adjunct senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations
http://www.scmp.com/portal/site/SCMP/menuitem.2c913216495213d5df646910cba0a0a0/?vgnextoid=4f2a6ac45d09d110VgnVCM100000360a0a0aRCRD&vgnextfmt=teaser&ss=China&s=News
Updated on Nov 13, 2008
Last week's historic visit to Taiwan by Beijing's cross-strait chief, Chen Yunlin , which culminated in four useful agreements, focused attention on issues of human rights as well as politics. Some issues concerned the proper government response to public protests in a free society. Others involved fair investigation of former and present government leaders suspected of corruption.
Chinese have recognised the importance of protecting foreign envoys for almost 3,000 years. The feudal states that contended for power before establishment of the Qin dynasty reciprocally assured the personal safety of their emissaries. Such protection has continued to be indispensable to inter-state co-operation.
After police in Tainan failed to prevent an assault on Mr Chen's deputy, president Ma Ying-jeou's government was obligated to do better during Mr Chen's visit. Although police could not prevent Mr Chen from being trapped in a hotel for eight hours by a huge mob of protesters, they did defend him against bodily harm throughout a stressful week.
In doing so, they went beyond the limits of a free society, forbidding peaceful protesters from displaying Taiwanese and Tibetan flags, confiscating flags from demonstrators, closing a store that played Taiwanese songs and seeking to minimise the visitors' awareness of the protests. There were also incidents of police brutality, albeit sometimes in response to violent provocations by demonstrators.
The police misconduct even outraged many local supporters of Mr Chen's visit. Mr Ma, in addition to implementing his campaign pledge to sponsor revision of the Assembly and Parade Law to eliminate protesters' need for advance official permission, should recommend amendments prohibiting the kind of undemocratic police practices that recently occurred and order training designed to enhance police compliance with the law. It is encouraging to note that Democratic Progressive Party chairwoman Tsai Ing-wen, who led the massive opposition demonstration, has subsequently called not only for a government review of police misconduct but also for a re-examination by her own party of its failures to maintain order among its demonstrators. The DPP, if it is to fulfil its essential role as democratic opposition, must not degenerate into an army of street fighters.
Some Taiwanese and foreign critics took the occasion of Mr Chen's visit to call attention to another crucial feature of democratic government - the fair prosecution of current and former officials suspected of corruption. The critics voiced three serious complaints about recent arrests and incommunicado detentions of prominent DPP figures who have served as government officials. They imply that the DPP is being singled out for prosecutions while corruption among Kuomintang leaders is being ignored. They also claim that: most DPP suspects have been held incommunicado without a court examination of the justification for their detentions; and that prosecutors' offices have been leaking detrimental information about the suspects to the media while denying them knowledge of the leaks and a chance to refute the "trial by press".
These practices, it is said, bring into question the political neutrality of the judiciary, and the presumption of innocence and other elements of due process required for the fair and open trials essential to democracy, raising the spectre of the unjust procedures of "the dark days of martial law" (1947-1987). It is not clear whether critics' claims of "selective prosecution" are well founded. Recent arrests may simply reflect massive corruption by the DPP, which dominated executive government for the past eight years - corruption that allegedly reached as high as former president Chen Shui-bian and his family.
Oddly, although during the Chen administration some prosecutions were brought against both DPP and KMT figures, some obvious KMT targets were overlooked despite reportedly thick dossiers compiled by Control Yuan investigators. Mr Ma should appoint a commission of impartial experts to review such prosecutions.
It does not appear that any of the recently detained DPP figures were denied a court hearing or their right to counsel. Moreover, there is a legislative basis for the courts' decisions to detain them incommunicado for up to four months of investigation if there is a reasonable basis for believing that the suspects might otherwise falsify evidence. Yet, in view of the harshness of this pre-indictment sanction and the obstacles it creates to mounting an adequate defence, it ought to be invoked rarely.
Certainly, the Legislative Yuan, or the commission suggested here, should re-examine legislation to strike a new balance between the threat of corruption to a democratic government and the threat of incommunicado detention to civil liberty.
The charge of biased prosecution leaks to the press seems to be the most straightforward of the critics' complaints. Such leaks, which occur in many countries, do appear to have taken place and cannot be allowed in a democratic system.
Jerome A. Cohen is co-director of NYU's US-Asia Law Institute and adjunct senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations
http://www.scmp.com/portal/site/SCMP/menuitem.2c913216495213d5df646910cba0a0a0/?vgnextoid=4f2a6ac45d09d110VgnVCM100000360a0a0aRCRD&vgnextfmt=teaser&ss=China&s=News
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
