28國際學者聯合聲明：馬掀政爭 破壞民主 〔記者羅添斌／台北報導〕 馬政府濫權監聽、發動政爭，譚慎格等二十八位國際學者憂慮台灣民主自由及人權發展倒退，昨天發表「台灣憲政危機聯合聲明」，對於馬總統以特偵組對付政敵、干涉司法程序以達政治意圖，及試圖使立法院長王金平喪失職務等手段，表達深切的關注。 聲明認為，台灣的民主危機必須靠台灣體制及人民自行解決，但他們認為台灣應廢除特偵組及其權力，將檢察權回歸常態運作；進行司法改革以求去除政治干預；進行國會改革，使立法程序真正反映政治交涉中的互讓與妥協。 參與發表聯合聲明的國際學者包括：譚慎格、章家敦、金德芳、家博、林霨以及韋傑理等人。 聲明指出，他們對當前台灣政府在民主、自由及人權發展的倒退，深感憂慮。馬政府執政以來，台灣政府對民主與公義的侵蝕便不曾止息，馬王政爭事件嚴重破壞民主政治權力分立及制約與平衡的基本原則。「我們對於馬總統以特偵組對付政敵、干涉司法程序以達政治意圖，及試圖使立法院長王金平喪失職務等手段，表達深切關注」。 馬以特偵組對付政敵 聲明認為，馬政府運用特偵組遂行政治意圖，特偵組成為執政國民黨掃蕩政敵的工具，更進一步運用監聽做為其手段。聲明指出，如果馬總統認為王金平的行為構成關說，那馬「可能得回家照照鏡子」。 聲明表示，二○一○年十一月，當地方法院對前總統陳水扁遭指控的一項罪名做出無罪判決時，馬總統就曾公開批評此項判決，表示司法系統不應「與現實脫節」及「違背社會期待」。同月九日，馬邀請司法院長及檢察總長聚餐，再次表達對該判決的不滿。兩天後，最高法院忽然宣布對陳前總統遭另案起訴的最終「有罪」判決。國際學者們在聲明中提出質疑表示，「如果這不是關說，那甚麼才是關說？」 馬公然批判司法判決 聲明還認為，馬總統試圖運用關說一案解除王金平立法院長的職務，還運用身兼國民黨主席的身分使王金平遭開除黨籍，要讓王因喪失不分區立委資格同時喪失立法院長的身分。「馬總統對自身所兼有的兩種身分之濫用，不禁令人想起戒嚴時期黑暗的過去，黨國不分，而法院則為前兩者服務」。 資料出處: 2013/10/15自由時報 ------------------------------------------------------- Human rights, democracy threatened As international SCHOLARS and writers who applauded the transition to democracy, that began in the late 1980s, we are deeply concerned about the backsliding of freedom, democracy and human rights under the current administration in Taiwan. While an erosion of democracy and justice has been ongoing since this administration assumed office in 2008, recent events constitute a fundamental breach of the basic principles of separation of powers and checks and balances in a democracy. We refer in particular to President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) use of the Special Investigation Division (SID) of the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office, set up in 2007 to deal with major corruption cases involving government officials, against his political opponents, to his interference in the judicial system for political purposes and to his attempt to remove Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng (王金平). POLITICAL USE OF SID During the past years, the SID under Prosecutor-General Huang Shih-ming (黃世銘), has increasingly become a tool of the ruling Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) to rid itself of its political opponents. It now turns out that SID has made extensive use of wiretaps against its opponents. The SID relentlessly pursued former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), as well as prosecuted about four dozen members of the democratic opposition and former Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government officials. Many of those were later declared not guilty by the courts. Only when the evidence could not be ignored, did the SID go after officials in the KMT, such as Cabinet secretary-general Lin Yi-shih (林益世) and Taipei Legislator Lai Su-ju (賴素如). JUDICIAL INTERFERENCE In the present crisis, Ma is accusing Wang of “influence peddling” saying that Wang allegedly called then-justice minister Tseng Yung-fu (曾勇夫) and Chief Prosecutor Chen Shou-huang (陳守煌) to urge them not to appeal a not-guilty verdict by the High Court against DPP caucus whip Ker Chien-ming (柯建銘). If Ma considers this “influence peddling,” then he needs to look in the mirror. In November 2010, when a court declared Chen not guilty on one of the charges against him, Ma publicly criticized the verdict in the strongest of terms, saying that the justice system should avoid “detaching itself from the outside world” and “departing from public expectations.” A couple of days later, on Nov. 9, 2010, Ma invited the chief justice and the prosecutor-general for dinner and again fulminated against the not-guilty verdict. Two days later, on Nov. 11, 2010, the Supreme Court abruptly came down with a final “guilty” verdict in another case against the former president. If this was not influence peddling, then what is? SEPARATION OF POWERS Ma has attempted to use the “influence peddling” case against Wang to remove him from his position. The president then used his position as chairman of the KMT to have Wang’s membership in the party revoked. As Wang is an at-large member of the legislature, this would also mean that he would lose his position as speaker. Ma’s convoluted use of his two positions harks back to Taiwan’s dark days of Martial Law, in which the party, the state and the judiciary were synonymous. If Wang had committed any minor transgressions, this could certainly have been dealt with by a disciplinary committee within the legislature. If he had committed a violation of any law, then a due process of law would have been appropriate, rather than an attempt to evict Wang from the KMT. Ma’s actions against the speaker certainly constitute a violation of the principle of checks and balances in a democracy. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS First and foremost, it is up to the people and political system of Taiwan to resolve the crisis. In our, view as foreign observers who care deeply for Taiwan and its future, it is clear that actions along the following lines would be most helpful and appropriate: ‧ Abolition of the SID and an end to the powers that were vested in this office. A return to normalcy in the prosecutorial branch is long overdue. ‧ Judicial reform with the goal of removal of political influence in the judiciary, ensuring a complete independence from both the executive and legislative branches of government, leading to a clear separation of powers. ‧ Legislative reform so that the legislative process becomes a true give-and-take of political negotiations, where all political opinions are respected and where decisions are made on the basis of rational discussion rather than physical threats and confrontation. Clive M. Ansley, Canadian human rights lawyer and member, board of directors, Lawyers Rights Watch Canada, Vancouver, Canada Coen Blaauw, executive director, Formosan Association for Public Relations, Washington Jean-Pierre Cabestan, professor and head, Department of government and international studies, Baptist University, Hong Kong Gordon Chang, author, “Nuclear Showdown: North Korea Takes On the World and The Coming Collapse of China” Wen-yen Chen, professor emeritus, University of the District of Columbia, and former president, North America Taiwanese Professors’ Association William Cox, MD, Nome, Alaska Michael Danielsen, chairman, Taiwan Corner, Copenhagen June Teufel Dreyer, professor, Department of political science, University of Miami, Miami Stephen R. Halsey, assistant professor, Department of history, University of Miami, Florida William T. Hipwell, professor, Department of geography and environmental studies, Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada Michael Rand Hoare, research associate, School of Oriental and African studies, University of London Thomas G. Hughes, former chief of staff to the late senator Claiborne Pell, Washington. Bruce Jacobs, professor, Department of Asian languages and studies, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia Richard Kagan, professor emeritus, Department of history, Hamline University, St Paul Minnesota and author, “Taiwan’s Statesman, Lee Teng-hui and Democracy in Asia” and “Mayor Chen Shui-bian: Taipei, Taiwan” Mark Kao, president, Formosan Association for Public Affairs, Washington. Jerome Keating, associate professor, National Taipei University (retired), and author, “Island in the Stream, a Quick Case Study of Taiwan’s Complex History” and “Taiwan, the Search for Identity” Hon David Kilgour, former member of the Canadian Parliament and former secretary of state for Asia-Pacific (2002-2003), Ottawa, Canada Paul Kovenock, US Department of state (retired), Arlington, Virginia Donald Rodgers, associate professor, Department of political science, Austin College, Texas Christian Schafferer, associate professor, Department of international trade, Overseas Chinese University, Taiwan, editor, “Journal of Contemporary Eastern Asia” president, Asian Political and International Studies Association David Schak, adjunct associate professor of international business and Asian studies, Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia Rev Michael Stainton, president, Taiwanese Human Rights Association of Canada, Toronto, Canada Ross Terrill, Fairbank Center, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, author, “The New Chinese Empire and Mao” Rev Milo Thornberry, author, “Fireproof Moth, A Missionary in Taiwan’s White Terror” John Tkacik, US foreign service (retired) and president, China Business Intelligence, Alexandria, Virginia Arthur Waldron, Lauder professor of international relations, Department of history, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia Hon Josef Weidenholzer, Member of European Parliament, professor, Institute of societal and social policy, Johannes Kepler University of Linz, Austria Gerrit van der Wees, editor, “Taiwan Communique”, Washington Michael Yahuda, professor emeritus, the London School of Economics, visiting scholar, George Washington University, Washington taipeitimes/News/editorials/archives/2013/10/14/2003574446/3
Posted on: Tue, 15 Oct 2013 01:05:41 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015