~~~ 不變的憤怒鳥

昨天收到馬英九在哈佛的指導教授 Jerome A. Cohen 的回信。他在信中附上對最近臺灣局勢的看法,這篇應該就是發表在香港的 SOUTH CHINA MORNING POST。

很不巧的,我今天會很忙,沒時間處理這篇。

大家加油了!

按下圖可以看到原來的文件 (pdf 檔) :

以下是重編的英文檔 :

Improved cross-strait relations appear to have come at a cost to some civil liberties in Taiwan, writes Jerome Cohen

Ties that blind

Last week’s historic visit to Taiwan by Beijing’s crosss trait 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 or 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 interstate 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 reexamine 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

廣告

Comments on: "馬英九老師 ( Jerome A. Cohen )的評論" (8)

  1. 我看到第一段就已經有點吐血
    靠北邊走!那四條協議簡直是爛到爆
    這位花佛教授還給我寫useful的形容詞

    按讚數

  2. 這篇的重點
    有教育馬斷腿的意味嗎?
    但是覺得要教育馬斷腿教育的很"溫和"咧!
    總覺得搔不到癢處

    按讚數

  3. 一個國民黨職業學生的指導教授, 他的學術立場恐怕是很值得推敲…

    文中提到中國人說兩國交戰不斬來使, 熟讀史書的都知道, 中國人一向以殺來使下馬威的.

    按讚數

  4. 文中體到幾點 在"假圖天國"已經有專人翻譯 支那日報還是依照中華人民共和國的自我催眠翻譯 實在是很痛心

    幾個重點
    我們沒有足夠的證明說國民黨是在選擇性辦案 最近幾位遭逮捕的人物 或許正好可以反應民進黨執政8年從陳總統帶頭貪腐的情況

    比較諷刺的是 當年陳總統在辦理貪腐的對像並不分國民黨還是民進黨 甚至很多罪證確鑿的國民黨大魚都無法辦理 建議馬總統應該指派中立人士重新審查這些案件

    面對民進黨官員被羈押的嚴重情況而言 立法院或者是作者建議的委員會應該重新找出一個防治貪腐的民主政府和受羈押人權的平衡點

    一個號稱民主自由的國家 將預設立場的審判細節透露給新聞界並非前所未聞但也是於法不合

    按讚數

  5. 原文http://chairmancat.blogspot.com/
    有裏面有寫到華爾街日報及紐約時報,對於聲押阿扁的看法..
    ==================================
    2008年11月14日 星期五
    國際媒體觀察:陳水扁聲押的台灣形象

    以下這篇文章選自MJ:簡單讀英文各位可以對照一下,國內的新聞媒體形容國際媒體對陳水扁收押,和文章中的觀察有何異同? 另外,日本和台灣的關係向來密切,在雲程兄所寫的各國報導CSB被羈押報導中,可以看到日本注意到此事件對於台灣/中國關係的影響,以及國民黨/民進黨勢力的消長。

    國際媒體觀察:陳水扁聲押的台灣形象
    台灣因為陳水扁聲押事件而登上國際版面,這是觀察國際報導的好時機,也是對比國內媒體是否過於激化的好機會。
    今天聯合報有一則新聞頭條是:扁遭收押 國際媒體大篇幅報導(連結可能失效),裡面舉了許多國際知名媒體對此事的報導,講得很像全世界都認同此次收押,是台灣國恥,或者全球都跟國內媒體一樣感到超級振奮,連入監獄得脫光光檢查也寫,似乎跟此有人不共戴天仇。十分有意思。
    但且讓我們一手來看看國內媒體似乎遺漏的部分吧,一如我前兩次已經說了,國際上已有媒體開始注意到台灣有條惡法,可讓檢察官不經起訴就直接押人。我比較想看看是否有更多國際媒體有進一步注意到此事。
    我不舉一般通訊社比如路透、美聯這類通訊社,因為他們有時報導會比較粗糙,直接引用國內媒體資料。我們看看大家耳熟能詳的美國全國性報紙:
    華爾街日報:兩句話斃了台灣檢察官

    Mr. Chen’s accountant and three of his senior advisers already have been detained in the corruption case but not indicted. Prosecutors in Taiwan are allowed to detain suspects for four months before an indictment.
    No evidence in the case has been made public. Taiwanese law requires all information be kept secret during an investigation.
    (全文)

    在談論此次陳水扁聲押時,華爾街日報在文章中特別分段說明,台灣檢察官可不經起訴就直接把嫌疑犯押上好幾個月。
    它又另開一段特別說明:本案都還沒有任何證據攤在陽光下給大眾瞭解。
    華爾街日報會把這個聲押背後的法條開出兩個段落來說明,顯然是要它的讀者瞭解,「這件事,外界都還看不到任何起訴證據,人犯就直接被檢察官關起來了。」
    華爾街日報怎麼形容陳水扁呢?
    Mr. Chen’s stance alienated many voters, but many Taiwanese view him as almost a folk hero for his role seeking international recognition for the island.

    這句話很恰如其份,許多台灣人認同他追求台灣國際認同的角色,並視他為英雄(folk hero..有點傳奇性人物)。
    紐約時報:馬走上終極統一路線
    The detention is the latest chapter in a series of political dramas that have been unfolding in Taiwan for a few years as the island’s two major parties, the Kuomintang and the Democratic Progressive Party, have bickered over relations with China and traded accusations of corruption.
    (全文)
    紐約時報沒有提到聲押的是怎麼回事,但把此事定調在:這是國民黨與民進黨多年來的惡鬥,這個惡鬥指的是雙方如何看待中國的態度,同時也指出雙方其實都有相互指控貪污的事情。言下之意,頗有用台灣兩黨喜歡用司法惡搞對方的意味。
    紐約時報對於陳水扁的形象也有如下描述:
    A populist with a penchant for fiery rhetoric, he was known during his two terms for his strong opposition to Beijing and his insistence that Taiwan, which separated from China in 1949, was not a province of the mainland.

    亦即他力抗北京,並強力主張台灣不是中國的一省。(加分,免費為台灣宣傳)
    但這裡用了一個populist(群眾主義者)的字眼來形容陳水扁。populist有人翻做民粹,但我一直搞不懂「民粹」是什麼意思。我用個比較粗淺的方式來比喻這個字眼,電視節目。一般商業電視台可視為populist,電視台會注意觀眾喜歡看什麼,留意收視率,然後投其所好,好一點的像「星光大道」老少咸宜,但若過份的話就像「霹靂火」這樣喜歡大灑狗血。因此講陳水扁是populist有點說他喜歡「討好選民」的意思。
    跟populist相反的就是elitist(菁英主義者),公視可視為這種代表,它不需要因應觀眾喜好來播節目,而是依照他們認為觀眾該看什麼節目來播放,反正又不需廣告收入,不需媚俗討好市場。但若太走菁英制,有時也會跟市場脫節,比如現在的馬英九與劉兆玄也有這種傾向,他們不認為需傾聽民意,「反正只要聽我領導就好了,選民有我的睿智嗎」。也因此你看馬劉對於許多政策,甚至是野草莓運動都展示出一種十分輕蔑的態度。(以上比喻若有失真,歡迎指正)
    紐約時報在報導陳水扁的同時,還有一段描述馬英九的:
    Mr. Ma, who took office in May, has pushed for closer ties with the mainland and opened the possibility of eventual reunification.

    它寫:馬英九力推與中共更緊密的關係,為未來終極統一做鋪路。
    馬總統,或許在國內大家現在霧裡看花,不知道您的態度,但為何紐約時報可以把您的作為看得這麼清楚呢?怪哉!
    Marketwatch(道瓊公司的專業財經網站)
    On Tuesday Chen was questioned for about five hours by prosecutors, who subsequently arrested him under a Taiwanese law that enables authorities to imprison a suspect for as long as four months before indictment.
    Newspapers across Asia Wednesday carried front-page images of Chen, handcuffed hands raised over his head, in an apparent gesture signaling he is a martyr defending Taiwan’s democracy and sovereignty.
    (全文)

    Marketwatch的文章同樣點出陳水扁的收押,是在沒有起訴的狀況下直接收押,這是台灣特有的法令。
    它另描述陳水扁那個高舉手銬高喊台灣民主與主權的畫面,塑造烈士形象。
    以上我只稍微舉了三家重量級國際媒體的報導,我們可看出三點:
    1. 陳水扁是在沒有起訴的狀況下,直接被關起來;
    2. 檢方還沒公布任何證據;
    3. 馬英九與中共關係密切,有朝終極統一前進的傾向。
    看得出來嗎?嗅得到政治味嗎?別再跟我說這完全是「司法獨立」的事了。此事放在國內,媒體所報導的貪污總額已經累積到了10億。
    但你看這麼注重財經數字的包括華爾街日報、道瓊的MarketWatch根本都沒寫這些金額,它只輕輕問了兩句話,國內的檢察官就露出馬腳了:
    1. 請問為何還沒起訴,就可把人關起來?
    2. 請問證據公布了嗎?
    昨天我看到有個台老美的部落格寫說,國內檢察官若喜歡玩這種「沒起訴先押人取供」的花招,應該可去Guantanamo應徵工作(看過Tom Cruise主演的A Few Good Men嗎?),裡面有不少同好。
    啊?檢察官不知道Guantanamo是什麼地方?那麻煩去請教李昌鈺博士如何?

    按讚數

  6. 上篇文章的原文聯結:
    http://chairmancat.blogspot.com/

    按讚數

  7. 馬政府包庇司法院圖利律師.違法遴選律師充任法官.扁案所有判決無效
    司法院遴選律師、教授、副教授、講師充任法院法官審查辦法違法遴選律師擔任法官.司法院圖利律師.違反司法人員人事條例第10條法官候補期間五年之規定.所遴選之法官根本不具法官資格.所有判決無效如果我們現在不挺身而出.下一次或我們的子孫再遭到不公平的司法待遇.甚至司法迫害那只能說是報應.希望結合大家的力量改革司法
    你或你的親友現正訴訟中的話請注意.如被判決有罪可以以法院組織不合法為【上訴或再審】
    經向TVBS與馬總統檢舉未獲回應.如果我們現在不挺身而出.下一次或我們的子孫再遭到不公平的司法待遇.甚至司法迫害那只能說是報應.希望結合大家的力量改革司法.如果願意連署請跟我連絡或寄至x54389456@yahoo.com.tw 信箱【請大家基於社會公平正義幫忙轉載或張貼本文】

    http://tw.myblog.yahoo.com/jw!JjkZGEyKRUN7qsMgwHQsuf0-/article?mid=2144&prev=2162&next=2137

    按讚數

發表迴響

在下方填入你的資料或按右方圖示以社群網站登入:

WordPress.com Logo

您的留言將使用 WordPress.com 帳號。 登出 / 變更 )

Twitter picture

您的留言將使用 Twitter 帳號。 登出 / 變更 )

Facebook照片

您的留言將使用 Facebook 帳號。 登出 / 變更 )

Google+ photo

您的留言將使用 Google+ 帳號。 登出 / 變更 )

連結到 %s

標籤雲

%d 位部落客按了讚: