The injustice of the verdict against Chen Shui-bian

It's no surprise Ma Ying-jeou never passed the bar exam

On September 11th, 2009, Taiwan's former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment. This development will certainly divert people's attention from the poor performance of current president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) during the Typhoon Morakot rescue effort -- a performance which brought his approval rating down to a record low of 16 percent.

But Chen's case stinks not only because Taiwan does not have a set of healthy tax regulations but also because the testimony of criminal suspect Jeffrey Koo, Jr. (辜仲諒) was used to convict Chen in exchange for dropping charges against Koo.

The fact that Ma was able to ignore the overwhelming stench of this case while his Harvard Law School mentor felt sad about it leads me to conclude that it's not surprising to learn that Ma never passed the bar exam!

Ma's former mentor Jerome Cohen is certainly not proud of his former student. This is how Cohen reacted instead:

"It is a very sad day, it is also a very important day."

And how could Cohen not be sad? He had earlier given Ma a hint about Chen's human rights, but Ma didn't pay any attention.

Now the kangaroo court is going to lay more charges on Chen, and the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT)-dominated Legislative Yuan is proposing yet another unfair law "decriminalizing" the use of the fund by government chiefs. This change will victimize only Chen while letting suspects in many previous corruption cases go free and will make things easier for future government officials to misuse their special allowances. If the new amendment is passed, pending corruption cases against KMT party members will be conveniently dismissed.

Because it could not stand the test of fair trial (presumed innocent until proven guilty), it is unlikely that the 1,415 pages of the judgment against Chen will ever be translated into English out of the fear that the content would be challenged by law experts around the world.

However, an English version of Chen's defense is available on a non-profit educational organization's site. and links are provided under "References" below.

I hope my analysis below will provide guidance to the people of Taiwan who may know very little about how political donations are dealt with elsewhere in the world and were blindly influenced by the pan-blue media in Taiwan into believing that Chen Shui-bian is guilty as charged. After all, a person is presumed innocent until proved guilty, and Chen should be treated with no exception.

Chen's unspent donations left over from previous election campaigns
First, I would like to introduce some forms which are readily available from the Internet, and which are common knowledge to tax practitioner in North America: "information returns" and "trust returns" like the ones below.

First is this:

CONTRIBUTIONS TO A REGISTERED PARTY OR TO A REGISTERED ASSOCIATION INFORMATION RETURN [PDF file]

This is the information return (T2092) which is filed annually by a registered party or a registered association to show the total contributions received, and all the slips detailing each contributor's amount of contribution and his name and address must be kept for 2 years for possible selective inspection by a government auditor.

But this type of information return does not exist in Taiwan because the KMT does not want to disclose their secret financial dealings and its total donations received.

There's also this:

IC75-2R7 Contributions to a Registered Party, a Registered Association or to a Candidate at a Federal Election

The information provided at the link above gives clear guidance to the subject discussed. Pay special attention to points 25, 26, 27, 28 (maximum deduction of $650 from tax payable so no one will benefit from a huge donation and consequently avoiding bribery), and 32 (no carry over of unused deductions to the following tax year).

In the US tax system
In the US, a political party can file an Income Tax Return for Certain Political Organizations [PDF file] (Form 1120-POL), and the rules are clear about what's exempt and what's not (investment income derived from political contributions are not exempt) see here.

There is other related tax info to be found here: "Trust income tax returns" like this form in Canada or like this one in the US.

But in Taiwan, the KMT does not want to pay taxes to the government on its investment income or business income or capital gains on sales of properties, nor do they want to return the assets to their rightful owners -- the people of Taiwan and to the now-defunct UNRRA -- so none of the aforementioned tax forms exist in Taiwan.

In other words, the KMT is like a criminal organization running some business enterprises while avoiding taxes along the way. And the transactions between the party and some key members of the party cannot be verified to be dealing at arm's length whereas the transactions between the party and the state were known to be indistinguishable during its terms in power.

In this respect, I find that the regulations in Taiwan needed serious overhaul.

In Chen's case, since no such filing requirements exist for political parties in Taiwan, it follows that the DPP wouldn't be able to file any returns similar to the ones mentioned above, nor would Chen be able to locate every last one of his supporters who donated to his election campaign and return the money to them (Which donors would get how much money back?) and ask them to donate again in future to other DPP candidates. So what could be done with the money left from Chen's election donations?

Chen couldn't report it under his personal income tax return -- nor should he have. Because the fund is for the purposes of his election or for other DPP functions, he knew that whenever there was a DPP event or whenever DPP candidates needed money for elections, he would be able to draw from these funds. In the meantime, moving the leftover donations abroad for investment was wise, and there was nothing wrong with that, otherwise he would have been subject to personal income taxes on this fund. That would have been an incorrect classification because this fund was not for his personal enjoyment. Moving money abroad did not constitute money laundering unless the prosecutors could establish that the money was obtained not from the donation leftovers but from a criminal act, e.g., money which belonged to the country.

There might have been disagreements between Chen and his wife as to how the money in this fund would be used, and perhaps his wife would have even liked to keep some (if not all) for their own family. While that would amount to selfishness, it wouldn't be a crime.

Additionally, people may have donated to Chen while not donating to other DPP candidates simply because people admired Chen so much for being a good Taiwanese role model who grew from a poor boy who almost had to drop out of school in order to work to help feed his family into a Taipei mayor with good record and, eventually, a national leader seeking reelection.

So, with the lack of Taiwan's tax regulations regarding political parties' information returns and/or tax returns, Chen couldn't be guilty on account of how the leftover donations were handled. While the KMT had all kinds of investment income and capital gains, they had never paid a cent of tax to the country -- this is tax avoidance.

The State Affairs Fund
This excerpt from "Former President Chen Shui-bian's Plea of Not Guilty Outside the Court (2)" provides some details:

The state affairs fund is similar in nature to the special allowances fund provided for administrative heads of government. The regulations governing both are loose and resemble guidelines more than strict laws. The application and reimbursement procedures of the state affairs fund have always been conducted in accordance with established practices. No one, from former President Chen and his aides to accountants in the Accounting Department of the Office of the President, has had any intention to commit crimes or corruption or to take money for their own pockets. They simply had inherited imperfect application and reimbursement procedures, which were the established practice left by the previous governments. This imperfect procedure can and should be reformed, but no one should be selectively charged with corruption simply because he or she had followed the previous governments' practice.

President Chen had, on his own initiative, cut his monthly salary by half, which means that his annual income was reduced by NT$5 million per year resulting in an NT$40 million reduction of his salary over his eight-year presidency. He had also, on his own discretion, terminated the Fongtian project and the Dangyang project, two secret National Security Bureau funds totaling NT$3.6 billion that used to be called "the President's private money." Moreover, he had donated all of his presidential election subsidies of more than NT$340 million. How then could such a president have any motive for embezzling a paltry NT$104 million from the state affairs fund? Further, in that fund, Chen has listed all fund expenses to prove that the total amount of expenditures from that fund had far exceeded the original amount allotted to it. For that reason, the accusation in the bill of indictment that "[Chen] had raised funds from other sources to pay for the expenses he listed, but he still put the state affairs fund into his private pocket" is more than absurd!

In addition to the above points, the unreliable testimony by Jeffrey Koo, Jr. -- who was cleared of any criminal charges by implicating Chen as being involved in a land deal -- also played a crucial role. However, throughout the indictment, the prosecutors assumed that Chen directed his wife (who didn't hold any public post) to act on behalf of him (who held a public post). We should all know that a person without an official post couldn't commit the crime of corruption; therefore, in order to convict Chen, the court had to assume -- without proof -- that Chen was the mastermind and that he directed his wife to commit the act of corruption.

It is widely believed that while Chen was so occupied with national affairs that he actually let his wife handle the family's financial affairs. If there's anything for Chen to regret, it would have been that he should have paid much more attention to what his wife was doing instead of being such a damn good Taiwanese nationalist leader, for it angered both China and the United States, causing him to be labeled as a troublemaker.

Chen's priority was always how to make Taiwan a normal nation, as he describes here in Block C of this interview on CNN's TalkAsia:


6:10 YouTube video: "Chen Shui-bian TalkAsia interview (01-2007) Part 3/3"
Chen Shui-bian TalkAsia Transcript

POSTED: 9:34 a.m. EST, February 2, 2007

[...]

[Q. by Anjali Rao:] President you're now in the last term of your presidency what are your priorities now?

A: As the leader of this nation, I want to make Taiwan into a normal country. Even though Taiwan is an independent, sovereign country, it is not yet a normal and complete country. Why do I say that Taiwan is not yet a normal country? Because if it were, it would be a member of the UN family and also be the member of the World Health Organization. Why do I say that Taiwan is not yet a complete country? Because our current Constitution has never been approved by our people. The 23 million people of Taiwan really need a new Taiwan constitution that is timely, relevant, and viable.

I want to put the emphasis on striking a good balance between prosperity and social justice and equity. Therefore, our main policy goals include increasing investment in Taiwan, continuing to create more job opportunities, bridging the gap between urban and rural areas, as well as decreasing the gap between the rich and poor. These are our major policy goals.

Holding Chen incommunicado without being charged, conducting a "trial by press" by leaking detrimental information to the media, and videotaping Chen's meetings with his lawyers (a practice which was declared unconstitutional by the Council of Grand Justices) had all violated Chen's right to build an effective defense. Topping it off was the unconstitutional switch of the presiding judge to Tsai Shou-hsun (蔡守訓) to take over Chen's case all pointed to the weakness of a fair trial.

The opinion from Chen's original lawyer about the unconstitutional change of the presiding judge to Tsai stated that the case should have been reverted back to the judge who was handling the case from the beginning, i.e. judge Chou Chan-chun (周占春) [Taiwan Matters translation]:

陳水扁原辯護律師鄭文龍表示，扁案從周占春合議庭被換到蔡守訓合議庭，違反法定法官原則，他認為全案違憲而且無效。

Chen Shui-bian's original lawyer Cheng Wen-lung said that since Chou Chan-chun was replaced with Tsai Shou-hsun by the procedural committee, this violates judicial principles, and he believed that this rendered the entire case unconstitutional and invalid.

陳水扁原辯護律師鄭文龍：「我們很有信心大法官應該會宣告這個案子違憲，既然是違憲的判決，當然是無效的判決，二審法院最好的方式是直接廢棄發回，再由一審重新審理，應該由當初的承審法官，周占春法官繼續審理這個案子，因為這個案子的序屬，我們認為還在周占春法官手上」

Cheng said, "We are confident that the Council of Grand Justices will declare this case unconstitutional. Since this is an unconstitutional ruling, it surely is an invalid ruling. The best way to deal with this in an appeals court (AKA "court of second instance") would be to dismiss and return the case to the first court proceeding ("court of first instance") for the original judge, Chou Chan-chun. Because of the order in which this trial has proceeded, we believe that the case is still under judge Chou's jurisdiction."

Here's what Ma's Harvard mentor, Jerome Cohen, had to say about the changing of judges:

Asked whether it was appropriate for the judge to have been changed half-way through Chen's trial, Cohen said it would have been reasonable if judge Tsai Shou-hsun (蔡守訓) had taken up and presided over the Taipei District Court's collegiate panel right from the start.

Because the judges were changed after the case had started, it was natural that there was public doubt over the matter, he said.

The chaos resulting from the recent erosion of justice in Taiwan reveals two key personnel who -- like cancer cells -- should have been removed immediately from the government's posts. A brief background check for them revealed some interesting details.

The first of these is Minister of Justice Wang Ching-feng (王清峰), who was the chairperson of the unconstitutional, pan-blue-dominated "319 Truth Commission" (319 槍擊事件真相調查特別委員會) (MORE: 1, 2, 3), a committee that tried to overturn Chen's 2004 presidential election victory by claiming that Chen staged the March 19, 2004 assassination attempt on himself in order to win sympathy votes.

Jerome Cohen's "Lesson in Integrity for All" contains a hidden message for Wang:

The case [which voided the criminal corruption conviction of former US senator Ted Stevens-R] also illustrates the importance of having a justice department chief courageous enough to repudiate his staff's misconduct, replace the offending prosecutors, initiate an investigation and drop the charges.

The second one is judge Tsai Shou-hsun, who just happens to be the judge who acquitted Ma Ying-Jeou for his involvement in his special allowance corruption case and jailed Ma's secretary, Yu Wen, instead.

Cohen's "Lesson in Integrity for All" also contains another hidden message for Tsai:

Several times during the trial, Judge Emmet Sullivan, prompted by dynamic defence counsel, reprimanded prosecutors for withholding evidence, and sought to remedy any damage to the defence.

Chen's case has caused outrage among the people in the English blogosphere. One example can be read here:

If you look at the evidence, it's actually fairly weak. One of the charges was to do with a land transaction for a science park. I don't believe testimony actually showed Chen's connection to it, just that of his wife. But, with almost all the charges, the prosecutor said "how could Chen not know". I'm not sure how why husbands are responsible for the crimes of their wives.

What Chen was guilty of was taking advantage of a big hole in Taiwanese law that allows politicians to deal with surplus campaign funds as they see fit. There were proposals to close this during Chen's presidencies, but the KMT-controlled legislature strangely cut them all down. So I'm not sure how that's a crime either, least of all money-laundering. To launder money it has to be obtained illegally, from criminal proceeds, etc. If the law doesn't say Chen wasn't entitled to keep it, moving it around can't possibly be money-laundering.

Here's another example by Jerome F. Keating Ph.D.: "The Real Source of Taiwan's Campaign Corruption," Tuesday September 15, 2009.

People say that Ma is keeping Chen in prison because Ma cannot continue to deceive the people of Taiwan without Chen being around to divert attention; in case you haven't noticed, the Mandarin word for "cheat" or "deceive" is piàn​ (騙), which is formed by combining two characters. Ironically, the left half is Ma's surname, which means "horse" (馬), and the right half is the latter half of the former president's given name: Bian (扁). Ma wishes to keep A-bian behind bars so A-bian's case can help Ma to continue deceiving the nation by drawing away attention from his poor performance.

Taiwanese people who divide themselves among pro-Chen or anti-Chen camps should view the whole situation from a broader scope. Since the Ma administration came into power in 2008, justice and rule of law in Taiwan are swiftly being eroded. Something has to be done quickly to stop this.

The KMT is not just a simple political party -- it is a criminal organization engaged in tax avoidance economic activities, and has never paid a cent of tax to the country on its investment and other business or capital gains income. They have illegally sold properties and assets misappropriated from the Taiwanese people and of international aid to private owners.

If the heavy fines imposed on the accused in Chen's case are paid, they will eventually wind up in the combined KMT government's coffers to assist the party in its subsequent criminal activities, e.g. tax avoidance economic activities and vote-buying schemes, resulting in a vicious cycle.

As Chen Shui-bian pointed out in the TalkAsia interview, the people of Taiwan have never approved the ROC constitution which has been used to govern Formosa since the arrival of the KMT per General Order no. 1. They never had a chance to conduct a fair election independent from the ROC constitution and were consequently deprived of the chance to have a normal functional legislative body to pass fair laws.

Taiwanese abroad should hold a demonstration in front of the UN, and the people of Taiwan should protest in front of the American Institute in Taiwan (AIT) to demand the confiscation of all the assets of the KMT criminal organization and evict that party from Taiwan. It is a Chinese party which should not participate in Taiwanese elections. Since there is no longer any hostility between the two Chinese parties (the KMT, and the CCP), the KMT's ROC government should terminate its exile status and return to its origins -- namely, any territory in China -- and let the de facto independent Taiwan become a normal nation.

References:
The English version of Chen's defense, in five parts:
http://www.wretch.cc/blog/ketagalan/12878262
http://www.wretch.cc/blog/ketagalan/12878271
http://www.wretch.cc/blog/ketagalan/12878272
http://www.wretch.cc/blog/ketagalan/12878274
http://www.wretch.cc/blog/ketagalan/12878276

Earlier on my personal blog:
* Tracking Taiwan's evaporating national assets - Ma is a suspected criminal on the loose

Previously on this blog:
* Tuesday, December 16, 2008, Taiwan Echo and Tim Maddog: "Seeing Chen Shui-bian's so-called "money laundering" case from another angle"

* Tuesday, August 14, 2007, Tim Maddog: "Ma Ying-jeou acquittal documentation online"

* Saturday, November 18, 2006, Tim Maddog: "The differences between the cases of Ma Ying-jeou and Chen Shui-bian"

The erosion of justice in Taiwan:
This has been a long-running series. Here, in chronological order, is a list of some recent letters on the subject and news about related events:

* November 6, 2008: Scholars and writers from around the world publish an "Open letter on erosion of justice in Taiwan." The same letter as an online petition has been signed by more than 2,000 people.

* November 25, 2008: Minister of Justice Wang Ching-feng (王清峰) calls the open letter "inaccurate."

* December 2, 2008: "Eroding justice: Open letter No. 2" counters Wang Ching-feng's claims.

* January 8, 2009: Over a month later, Wang Ching-feng comes up with "clarif[ications]" regarding the open-letter writers' so-called "misunderstandings."

* January 21, 2009: "Eroding justice: Open letter No. 3" is addressed to President Ma Ying-jeou.

* January 24, 2009: Two more "US-based Taiwan experts add [their] names to open letter [No. 3]."

* January 25, 2009: President Ma claims the public had gained confidence in the judiciary in 2008 -- the exact opposite of what this Taiwan News article tells us they actually felt:

According to recent surveys conducted by Academia Sinica and the Web site Yahoo! Kimo, over 50 percent of the people do not believe in Taiwan's judicial system and over 75 percent have no confidence that the Judicial Yuan will undertake judicial reform [...]

* May 22, 2009: An estimable group of scholars and writers -- 26 in all, and each one with a deep understanding of Taiwan and the surrounding facts -- has composed an open letter addressed directly to President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九). The letter addresses the ever-increasing problems with judicial fairness, press freedom, the lack of transparency in the Chinese Nationalist Party's (KMT) rapprochement with China, the loss of Taiwan's sovereignty, and the loss of human rights. The argument the letter makes is rock solid. It is based on demonstrable facts.

* September 11, 2009: Chen Shui-bian gets life

* September 12, 2009: "Jerome Cohen, Ma's Law School Mentor, Again Speaks Out on the Ma Government Violation of Human Rights," by Jerome F. Keating Ph.D.

(Tim Maddog contributed to this post.)

Statement of support for Lee Ming-tsung

Prof. Lee Ming-tsung
image (cc) 楊竣傑
via 生命力新聞

Statement
We, the bloggers of Taiwan Matters, stand in solidarity with National Taiwan University Professor Lee Ming-tsung (李明璁) following his indictment last month on charges of violating the Assembly and Parade Act (集會遊行法).

Professor Lee participated in a protest in November 2008 with a group of students which later came to be known as the "Wild StrawBerries Movement." They had three specific demands [edited here for formatting, clarity, spelling, and completeness]:

1. President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and Premier Liu Chao-shiuan (劉兆玄) must publicly apologize to all citizens [for creating the situation which allowed the police to treat protesters the way they did during Chen Yunlin's (陳雲林) visit to Taiwan].

2. National Police Agency (NPA) Director-General Wang Cho-chiun (王卓鈞) and National Security Bureau Director Tsai Chao-ming (蔡朝明) must step down [to take responsibility for the police brutality that occurred as a result of the massive police presence].

3. The Legislative Yuan (行政院) must revise the Parade and Assembly Law (集會遊行法), which currently restricts the rights of the people [and which are set to become even more repressive early in 2009]. [This is basically a simple demand for "Freedom of Assembly."]

If there had been sufficient reason to charge Professor Lee, it could have been done at the time of the protest instead of seven months later.

In the interim, political persecution, threats, and violence have with increasing frequency been carried out against those who are active in their opposition to the Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) administration's policies of moving politically closer to China and reversing the progress made during Taiwan's transition to sovereign democracy over the past twenty years.

The current administration has severely undermined the integrity of Taiwan's judicial system with its continued detention of former President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) while justice officials perform skits mocking the defendant. Despite President Ma's promises that he would reform the Assembly and Parade Act, all indications are that it will become a stricter law than it was previously.

In fact, more laws infringing on free speech are being passed. One example is the Act Governing the Administrative Impartiality of Public Officials (公務人員行政中立法):

The Act prohibits academics from wearing or displaying flags or emblems of any political parties or groups at teachers' or researchers' offices. It also prohibits academics from convening demonstrations, launching signature bids and the editing, printing or distribution of political flyers or related documents using public equipment at public offices. The Examination Yuan and the Executive Yuan are also authorized to impose more bans through administrative orders.

The indictment of Professor Lee is yet another example to add to the ever-growing list of partisan indictments which strongly suggest systemized political persecution. There is no political capital to be gained by such actions, except perhaps in Beijing.

What we need in Taiwan is justice, not the "just us" mentality that is currently being demonstrated by the Ma administration.

To summarize, we stand behind Professor Lee Ming-tsung in his rational, nonviolent attempts to defend and deepen Taiwan's democracy. As long as the current government's policies continue to carry us backward toward an authoritarian past, the protests are likely to grow.

Signed,
The Taiwan Matters blog team

Participate
Others who wish to "sign" this statement can do so in the comments section below or let us know by e-mail (address is in the sidebar).

FURTHER READING/VIEWING:
Learn more about the controversial practices of the current judicial system.

* The Alliance for Democracy and Human Rights (捍衛民主人權陣線) harshly criticizes the Ma administration and shows strong support for Professor Lee as well as for National Taiwan Normal University (國立台灣師範大學) Professor Lin Chia-fan (林佳範) in the wake of his indictment on charges similar to those being pressed against Professor Lee.

* The Monday, July 13, 2009 edition of the Taipei Times has an editorial piece by Chiu Hei-yuan (瞿海源) called "The Act that silences academics."

* The Tuesday, July 14, 2009 Taipei Times reports that "More than 120 academics and human rights activists said yesterday they would turn themselves in to prosecutors for breaking the Assembly and Parade Act (集會遊行法) in a protest against the legislation." Read all about it in an article titled "Activists, academics 'surrender' to protest law."

* The full text of the new Act Governing the Administrative Impartiality of Public Officials (公務人員行政中立法) can be read in English on Brock Freeman's blog.

* Read David Reid's recent post on how the Assembly Law attacks freedom of speech.

* Taiwan Echo blogs in English and Hanzi on the illegal reasoning behind the latest extension of the detention of Chen Shui-bian: Lawless Taipei District Court extends Chen's detention based on illegal taping; 目無法紀的蔡守訓與台北地院用違法盜錄的看守所對話延長對扁的羈押

* Read a March 2009 statement from Chen Shui-bian (translated into English) which mentions interference by Minister of Justice Wang Ching-feng (王清峰).

* Watch Minister of Justice Wang Ching-feng in August 2008 publicly discussing details of the ongoing investigation into the case against Chen Shui-bian as covered by New Taiwan Forum (新台灣論壇), FTV (民視新聞台), and Talking Show (大話新聞).

* Read Minister of Justice Wang Ching-feng's denial of what you see happening in the three video clips above.

(Written by all current team members, posted by Tim Maddog.)

---

Tags: Taiwan, 台灣, Lee Ming-tsung, 李明璁, Assembly and Parade Act, 集會遊行法, Ministry of Justice, 法務部, Wang Ching-feng, 王清峰, Chen Shui-bian, 陳水扁

Cross-posted at It's Not Democracy, It's A Conspiracy!

Chen's 119 letter to Ma

President Chen Shui-bian, under investigation along with most of the former first family for corruption and money laundering, has sent a letter to President Ma Ying-jeou asking him to lift the travel ban on his daughter Chen Hsing-yu (陳幸妤). Taipei Times reports:

The move came after Chen Hsing-yu broke down in front of her father while visiting the former president last week....

The former president wrote: “If Chen Hsing-yu cannot go to the US, she might not be emotionally capable of dealing [with the situation],” [Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Tsai Huang-liang (蔡煌瑯)] said.

He added that Chen Shui-bian was worried his daughter might develop a mental disorder or try to commit suicide because of the travel restrictions.

When Chen Hsing-yu visited her father in the detention center on Friday, she reportedly cried to her father about not being able to go to the US as planned.

The former president asked Tsai to go to the Ministry of Justice to plead with Minister Wang Ching-feng (王清峰) to let Chen Hsing-yu go to the US on July 1 to register for school, as she has plans of leaving with her children to study and work in the US.

While I don't want to question former president Chen's motives, it seems to me this letter is grandstanding. It was the prosecutors who placed the ban on Chen Hsing-yu's travel when they charged her with perjury in relation to this case. I would suggest that any reversal of that decision by the Ministry of Justice, especially under pressure from President Ma, would be exactly the sort of overt political interference in the judicial system which the DPP has condemned repeatedly as being part of the problem in not only Chen's prosecution, but also in cases like Ma's cointinued appeals in his case against Hou:

Hou [Kuan-jen (侯寬仁)] was one of the prosecutors probing Ma’s handling of his special allowance funds when Ma was Taipei mayor, minister of justice, vice chairman of the Mainland Affairs Council and other posts.

Ma accused Hou of inaccurately documenting his questioning of Wu Li-ju (吳麗洳), a Taipei City Government treasurer, about how Ma used his special mayoral fund.

There is ample cause to believe that the prosecutors in Chen's case are acting both inappropriately and vengefully. Still, I have to wonder just what is on Chen's mind, beyond possibly panicked concern for his daughter and maybe hopes of gaining political points against Ma.

Summary of links from June 4th

Today's Chinese students do not know much about their recent history. They have never seen the famous image of the brave Tank Man of Tiananmen (mostly text -- for video clips see the next link below), and I am not surprised that they haven't seen the image.

This situation is similar to that of many Taiwanese students who had never heard of the 228 Massacre until they went abroad in the 70's and 80's.

I have summarized a few informative links with posts related to the events June 4^th, 1989, but written 20 years later.

* Here are six educational video clips about Tiananmen.

* Read about Beijing blocking the media to this very day.

* Take a look at irresponsible business engagement with China and forced labor camps (Insist on buying things produced in your own country whenever you can, and support both the domestic economy and articles 23(3) and 24 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights at the same time.)

*See how the richest party in Taiwan blocked an important and symbolic resolution, because obviously both that party and the CCP are anti-democratic kleptocrats.

* Read a scholar's view of another anniversary, and some words from the Australian who also condemned (or praised?) the blue-dominated media for doing a really good job on this issue as he commented:

It is clear the KMT and its cohorts in the media have succeeded in convincing a significant percentage of people in Taiwan that A-bian is an evil monster who doesn't even deserve basic human rights. As a result it is difficult to have a calm and rational conversation about the topic.

Thanks to him, I will not need to write a separate post since I also signed the petition based on the same principles as him. Many Taiwanese are quick to blame the former president for the DPP's poor performance in the last election, and these same people tend to overlook Chen's basic human rights.

* Observe how the government that no one recognizes as having the sovereignty of the land it occupies has no plans on how to carry on with the process of transitional justice, but has every interest in reviving a dead dictator's legacy. It continues to introduce new laws that will be instrumental in abusing the rights of some selected citizens while failing to prosecute others like this one.

(With some editing by Tim Maddog)

The injustice of Chen Shui-bian's detention

When they come for you, will there be anyone left to speak up?

Friend of Taiwan Luby Liao has a petition online demanding the immediate release of former President Chen Shui-Bian (陳水扁). The text of the petition reads as follows:

We the undersigned decry the increasing abuse of power by Taiwan's Ministry of Justice and its prosecutors as they violate the human rights of Taiwan's former president Chen Shui-bian and deny him due process of law in the current case against him. While neither making a judgment as to the guilt or innocence of Chen, we are appalled at the way that he is being unduly imprisoned (over 160 days and counting) as well as how his attorney-client privileges have been violated. In contrast to numerous past violators of money-laundering from the opposite political camp who have either never been detained or have received only a slap on the wrist by the courts when found guilty, Chen is being hounded and persecuted in what is an apparent political vendetta.

We hereby condemn the persecution and the violation of human rights conducted by the justice system and demand that Chen be released immediately.

Here's my own contribution (I'm #43) plus links that I didn't include in the original [as usual, hover your cursor on the links for more info]:

From the recording of Chen's conversations with his lawyers, to the judges' skit mocking Chen, to the one-sided leaks of information to the pro-KMT-dominated media, to the release of a wanted criminal who made statements against Chen, to the switching of the presiding judge to the same one who declared Ma Ying-jeou innocent (in a case where Ma admitted to depositing around NT$15 million of what he called "public funds" into his personal bank account) [Correction: "only" about NT$11 million went into his and his wife's accounts, but another NT$80,000/month (times eight years = NT$7,680,000) was used "to reward staff members," too], to the latest tacked-on charges, to punishing Chen for using hunger strikes to protest this kangaroo court, this has been a total travesty of justice.

On the blog with the petition, you can also sign up for the "I Love Taiwan" Google Group.

Why should I speak up?
If you have any doubts whatsoever, perhaps a reminder of the words of Martin Niemöller will help you make up your mind:

When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.

Then they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
I did not speak out;
I was not a Jew.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out for me.

Now's your chance. Say something.

---

John Hancocks: Taiwan, 台灣, Chen Shui-bian, 陳水扁, Ma Ying-jeou, 馬英九, special allowance fund, 特支費, petition, 簽署

Cross-posted at It's Not Democracy, It's A Conspiracy!

Ma Ying-jeou's approval rating is down again

Stuck in a rut

A new survey released just yesterday which was conducted by the pro-blue Global Views Magazine puts President Ma Ying-jeou's (馬英九) approval rating at 28.6% [648 KB PDF file] -- down 5.9 percentage points from last month's 34.5% [316 KB PDF file].

Back at the Ma-World Theme Park, this might be considered a "bounce," since his approval rating in October 2008 was only 23.6% -- about the same as TVBS says [156 KB PDF file] Chen Shui-bian's (陳水扁) current approval rating is.

BTW, the Global Views survey listed above gives Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) (Ma's party) legislators an overall approval rating of only 19.9%.

Worst. Legislators. Evah.

Who's your daddy?
Keep in mind that all of the polls quoted above favor Ma and the KMT -- while book sales recently put Chen at #1:

When I photographed this in February 2009,
Chen Shui-bian's book "Taiwan's Cross" (台灣的十字架) was
in the number one spot at Eslite Bookstore (誠品書店),
beating Barack Obama's "Dreams from My Father."
(Click to enlarge)
Who's the failest [sic] of them all?
At a press conference today, Ma had this to say in response to a reporter's question about his "political achievements" behind the low approval rating he has just 10 months in office [transcription via SETN, translation mine]:

我們覺得大的方向都是正確的 但是溝通的工作應該更加強。

We believe that we're moving mostly in the right direction, but we need to work harder at communicating.

Ma seems to have been consulting his "magic mirror" again.

Expect even more mendacious propaganda.

---

Nodes: Taiwan, 台灣, Ma Ying-jeou, 馬英九, Chen Shui-bian, 陳水扁, surveys, 民調

Cross-posted at It's Not Democracy, It's A Conspiracy!

Deep thoughts, February 15, 2009

Number one bestseller (Humanities & Science)

No matter what the pro-China/pro-Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) media want you to believe, Taiwan's former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) is still not "unpopular."


Chen Shui-bian's book "Taiwan's Cross" (台灣的十字架) is
in the number one spot at Eslite Bookstore (誠品書店),
beating Barack Obama's "Dreams from My Father."
(Click to enlarge)

---

Literary limnings: Taiwan, 台灣, deep thoughts, 深思, Chen Shui-bian, 陳水扁, book, 書本

Cross-posted at It's Not Democracy, It's A Conspiracy!

Who controls Taiwan's courts?

Chen vs. Chen

In the "final ruling" of a slander case filed by Taiwan's former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) against Minister of National Defense Chen Chao-min (陳肇敏) because the latter said regarding the March 19, 2004 shooting of the former that "the shooting case must have been staged," Chen Chao-min was found "not guilty."

High court spokesman Wen Yao-yuan (溫耀源) said that it didn't amount to slander because Chen Chao-min's statement was in line with the findings of the [unconstitutional] "319 Truth Commission" (319 槍擊事件真相調查特別委員會) [MORE: 1, 2, 3] (led by now-Minister of Justice Wang Ching-feng [王清峰] -- who once told a reporter that the commission didn't have the money to come up with any evidence [!]).

Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) appointees once again make groundless allegations with impunity, but Wang Ching-feng pretends that the KMT can't control the courts. She takes the public for fools. Personally, I hope that the Taiwanese never forget what former president of the Executive Yuan, Hsu Shui-teh (KMT), once said: "The courts belong to us." ("法院是我們家[國民黨]開的.")

---

Exhibits for the defense: Taiwan, 台灣, Chen Shui-bian, 陳水扁, 319 Truth Commission, 319 槍擊事件真相調查特別委員會, Chen Chao-min, 陳肇敏, judiciary, 司法

Cross-posted at It's Not Democracy, It's A Conspiracy!

Seeing Chen Shui-bian's so-called "money laundering" case from another angle

by Taiwan Echo and Tim Maddog

When the overseas deposits of former Taiwan president Chen Shui-bian's (陳水扁, AKA "A-bian") family -- said to be as high as 300 million US dollars -- were exposed couple of months ago, my instincts told me, A-bian will "die a horrible death" (to borrow Ma Ying-jeou's words). Forget about the insane hatred that pro-blue supporters have for A-bian. Simply because of the huge sum of the money, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) will definitely crush him.

Below is how I see their "blue" print:

Chen Shui-bian claims that the money -- handled by his wife without his knowledge -- consists of leftover donations which came from his supporters during his election campaigns. If so, then the money would belong either to Chen himself or to the DPP -- the party that nominated Chen as a candidate. Whichever one of these it is, it's certain that the money belongs neither to the government nor to the Taiwanese public. And it certainly doesn't belong to the KMT.

But the KMT will most probably do everything it can to make that money their own. The only way they can do so -- in spite of the evidence -- is to use the judiciary tools that they control to fabricate the witnesses and evidence in order to pin the crime of corruption on A-bian. Only by adopting this approach can the KMT claim that the money should be "legally returned" to their hands (the current government, that is).

If we closely watch the investigation of A-bian's alleged "money laundering" over the past couple of months, here's what we see:

1. First, use politicians and pro-blue media to brainwash people into believing "A-bian is corrupt." No evidence is required. In fact the KMT has been applying the same tricks for years to conduct "trials by press" against pro-Taiwan people, so this is really nothing new.

2. Secondly, interrogate, detain, and/or arrest anybody you can -- whether connected to the case or not -- entice, threaten, or coerce them into becoming witnesses for the state by using approaches like, "If you testify that Chen Shui-bian took the money, we won't put you in jail."

Do you think this is unlikely? There are reports/video evidence that Taiwan police have threatened civilians with jail time: "If you don't shut up, I will put you in jail." When Chen Yunlin came to Taiwan, some Tibetans were threatened by the police, being told, "If you dare to go to the airport, you will be jailed for the rest of your life." (警威脅敢抗議 關你一輩子 (Protesters threatened by the police with life in jail))

So again, threats are a common tactic used by Taiwan's police.

3. To save their own asses, the people who have been threatened (for example, poor Yeh Sheng-mao, the former Chief of Investigation Bureau) eventually come up with some so-called evidence, maintaining the false illusion that the uncivilized KMT will somehow keep their promises to set them free.

4. After the fabricated evidence is collected and well-staged, the KMT takes those witnesses (who are no longer valuable to them), turns them into defendants, and gives them heavy sentences (look what happened to poor Yeh Sheng-mao!).

5. Even without any guilt or even a bit of evidence, they put Chen Shui-bian in jail for sure.

As the KMT continues this conspiracy, we will continue to see "witnesses becoming defendants after their statements are taken."

As a result, the KMT will claim that the large amount of foreign deposits owned by Chen Shui-bian's family actually "belongs to the government" -- the KMT-run government, that is.

Poor Yeh Sheng-mao

Earlier, when former Investigative Bureau chief Yeh Sheng-mao held a press conference to announce his decision to follow the attorney office's instructions to incriminate Chen Shui-bian, "The wife of my ex-boss persuaded me to follow the right path and be loyal to the country," I immediately thought: This time, he will be done for.

When you hear these kinds of "keywords" from Chinese culture -- like "persuading someone to follow the right path", "loyal to the country", etc. -- coming from the police or the judiciary system, you know that the moment of catastrophe is at your doorstep.

As I expected, even after Yeh Sheng-mao made statements that were unfavorable towards A-bian, he was still indicted and punished with a heavy sentence.

2008-9-25 ：「北檢再傳葉盛茂 擬追訴涉洩密罪」
Taipei District Prosecutors' Office arraigns Yeh Sheng-mao again, intends to prosecute him for leaking secrets
http://www.libertytimes.com.tw/2008/new/sep/25/today-p7.htm

2008-10-4 ：「追訴兩起洩密罪 葉盛茂被求重刑」
Prosecutors up the indictment on Yeh Sheng-mao and seak for heavy sentence
http://www.libertytimes.com.tw/2008/new/oct/4/today-p3.htm

2008-12-5 ：「在葉盛茂重判10年 當庭癱軟」
Sentenced to 10 years in jail, Yeh Sheng-mao collapses in court
http://www.libertytimes.com.tw/2008/new/dec/5/today-p6.htm

In the last report cited,

"The judge describes in the official indictment document that, the fund of Chen's oversea deposit ***might*** contain some money from the state affairs fund." (highlight is mine)

"Might" contain some money from the state affairs fund? The court made its judgment based not on evidence but on this kind of guesses?!

The only reason I can come up with is that the KMT in fact couldn't find any evidence, but instead had to resort to the claim that "some of the money in Chen's overseas accounts **might** belong to the government," otherwise they will have no way to get their hands on the money.

There's another case where witnesses became defendants after their statements were taken:
2008-12-6 ： 「蔡美利、陳俊英 證人改被告」
Tsai Mei-li and Chen Chun-ying, originally witnesses, become defendants
http://www.libertytimes.com.tw/2008/new/dec/6/today-p6-2.htm

Will Chen Chih-chung give his money to the KMT?

According to a report by Liberty Times, Chen Chih-chung, son of Chen Shui-bian, agreed to transfer those overseas money to the attorney's office
2008-11-27：「陳致中同意匯回7億 珍未反對」
http://www.libertytimes.com.tw/2008/new/nov/27/today-fo1.htm

Pay attention to the words below:

『檢方表示，陳致中夫婦同意匯款，可視為犯後態度的考量之一，至於是否在起訴書中建請法院從輕量刑或予緩刑，由於還沒偵結，言之過早。林志豪說，陳致中夫婦是在檢方要求建議下，口頭表示同意匯回款項』

"The attorney office says that the fact that Chen Shui-bian's son Chen Chih-chung (陳致中) and daughter-in-law Huang Jui-ching (黃睿靚) have agreed to turn in the money could be considered as a reason for leniency. But it's too early to suggest a reduced sentence to the court because the investigation is still underway. Lin Chih-hao (林志豪) said Chen Chih-chung and Huang had made a verbal agreement to turn in the money (Echo note: remitted to a bank account created by the attorney office), following a suggestion of the attorney's office."

What is so shocking is that the attorney's office bluntly claims that "whether the money is turned in or not" will be considered a factor in determining a sentence.

Before the attorney's office has even provided evidence proving that this is government's money -- which they haven't been able to do so even after months of investigations using the manpower of almost the entire judiciary system in Taiwan-- the money still legally belongs to Chen's family.

Why on earth should Chen Chih-chung and Huang give their legally-owned money to the KMT government in order to have a lighter sentence considered in a case where the defendant has not yet been judged "guillty" by the court?

Isn't that blatant extortion by the attorney's office?

According to what has been reported so far, Chen Chih-chung and Huang have agreed verbally to that suggestion. I believe, if Chen really transfers that money to the KMT, or even if the Chen family "donates" all their wealth they have earned after generations, in the end they will still be given heavy sentences.

If someone is too naive to recognize the brutal nature of the KMT -- if that person fantasizes that as long as they open their hearts (and pocketbooks) to the KMT, then the KMT will keep their promises -- then that person will eventually lose everything.

We can forget about whether "this money should be returned to Chen's supporters." If Chen Chih-chung is smart enough, he should keep that money, so that in the difficult days to come he might have the chance to buy his way out. But as soon as he turns in the money, he loses any leverage with which to negotiate and brings himself and his family to a very tragic end.

Dazed and confused Taiwanese

According to what is revealed about Taiwan history, it has been a common approach for the KMT to coerce someone into making a false accusation (for example, claiming that some innocent person is a communist bandit), then kill him after the statement is taken.

Certainly, we won't see someone getting killed over that nowadays. The KMT's approach is far more delicate in this informative era. However, the conspiracy tactic still works the same way and is enough to get Chen family lose everything. Seeing that same old drama revealed right in front of our eyes, it sends a chill up my spine.

But how do the DPP, pro-green supporters, pro-Taiwan scholars, and pro-Taiwan bloggers see this huge amount of money? This really bothers me.

It's been months since Chen's overseas accounts were exposed. But I don't see any concern regarding whether this is the money that DPP supporters donated to Chen. If it is to be returned, the recipient should be the DPP. It should never be "returned" to a KMT government.

For the DPP and for everyone fighting against pro-China authoritarianism, limited resources are always a problem. The source of financial support is even more crucial when what they are fighting is an organ that owns all the state power of a country and that dominates the public opinion with biased pro-state media at the same time.

It's therefore a puzzle for me that I see only the KMT government is launching almost the power of entire country to take that money into their pocket, but none of pro-green supporters has made any effort to get it back.

Is it because that pro-green has never thought about this? Or to them the money is dirty so they feel despicable to get their hands on it?

I don't get it.

Former Taiwan president Chen Shui-bian indicted

Money laundering, corruption, and forgery?

The Saturday Taipei Times has the details in English, fellow blogger Echo posts about it in Chinese, and if you've got the language ability and an iron stomach, here's the indictment itself (956 KB PDF file) -- all 208 pages of it.

The Friday night edition of Talking Show (大話新聞) also had a lengthy discussion of the topic. Readers of this blog who view the show should be aware that the hard copies possessed by both host Cheng Hung-yi (鄭弘儀) and guest Chen Ming-yi (陳明義) (Chinese Nationalist Party [KMT] spokes-whiner) differ from the PDF I downloaded in more ways than one.

Remember, an indictment is not a verdict, and the suspect was detained at the Taipei Detention Center for an entire month before these official charges were even made.

---

Trumped-up charges: Taiwan, 台灣, Chen Shui-bian, 陳水扁, state affairs fund, 國務機要費, indictment, 起訴書

Cross-posted at It's Not Democracy, It's A Conspiracy!

Taiwan's former president Chen Shui-bian taken into custody

Another dark day in Taiwan's history

In yet another incredibly provocative move by the still-new Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) government, former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) was handcuffed by police and taken into custody this afternoon. A trial by public opinion has been conducted by leaking information and using the media to create an impression of guilt based on insinuation before actual evidence has been shown to the public.

Breaking News
Talking Show (大話新聞) just reported that Chen Shui-bian was beaten* (被打) by court bailiffs (法警) and that spokesman for the Wild Strawberries (野草莓) student protesters, National Taiwan University associate professor of sociology Lee Ming-tsung, (李明璁) was beaten by 4 police.

* UPDATE: This probably needs a clarification, but I'm not sure what kind yet. Reporters from ETTV and TVBS -- both very blue stations -- said that X-rays and other information indicated that Chen was indeed injured. Wednesday's Taipei Times mentions the claim that Chen "had been struck by a bailiff." [/update]

When they're at your front door, it'll be too late. Are you just gonna sit there, or are you going to go wake everybody up?

---

Blunt trauma wounds: Taiwan, 台灣, Chen Shui-bian, 陳水扁, state affairs fund, 國務機要費, Ma Ying-jeou, 馬英九, martial law, 戒嚴, police state, 警察國家, violence, 暴力

Cross-posted at It's Not Democracy, It's A Conspiracy!

WTF did Chen Shui-bian do?

The truth is out there

Fellow blogger Michael Turton has already blogged about the latest scandal surrounding former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), and today's Taipei Times has some details:

Former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) apologized yesterday for failing to fully declare his past campaign funds and wiring a large sum overseas, but denied embezzling money from the government.

Chen said that all the money he had ever accepted was for election purposes, adding that his wife, Wu Shu-jen (吳淑珍), was responsible for managing his funds, including any amount left from previous campaigns.

Chen read from a written statement and did not take any questions during a press conference yesterday afternoon, leaving his attorney Richard Lee (李勝琛) to deal with the media after he left.

Chen said his conscience drove him to come out and apologize because he could no longer lie to himself or the public.

"I have done something that is not allowed by the law," he said. "I owe the public an apology for falsely declaring my campaign funding for the past four Taipei mayoral and presidential elections."

What raised the most doubt for me was that people like Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislator Hung Hsiu-chu (洪秀柱) are the ones presenting this information to the public, but today, it sounds like Chen is contradicting what he said yesterday. This makes that part about Chen's "conscience dr[iving] him to come out and apologize" sound like bullshit.

Additionally, I've heard that Chen's son and daughter-in-law are currently out of the country.

WTF?!

This will most likely present a serious challenge for the DPP in the years to come.

A-gu (阿牛) is following the Chinese-language news on this one, and he brings readers the latest info about Chen and Wu's resignation from the DPP.

Whatever happens in this case, beware of the presentation, and focus on the facts.

---

Interjections: Taiwan, 台灣, Chen Shui-bian, 陳水扁, A-bian, 阿扁, Wu Shu-jen, Wu Shu-chen, 吳淑珍

Cross-posted at It's Not Democracy, It's A Conspiracy!