《南方快報》南方論壇 首頁 《南方快報》南方論壇

 
 常見問題常見問題   搜尋搜尋   會員列表會員列表   會員群組會員群組   會員註冊會員註冊 
 個人資料個人資料   登入檢查您的私人訊息登入檢查您的私人訊息   登入登入 

Dr. Jerome F Keating 專欄 (新漢譯)
前往頁面 上一頁  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  下一頁
 
發表新主題   回覆主題    《南方快報》南方論壇 首頁 -> Formosa Connection
上一篇主題 :: 下一篇主題  
發表人 內容
sunshine
版面管理員


註冊時間: 2007-09-22
文章: 1909

發表發表於: 星期一 一月 04, 2010 2:40 am    文章主題: 引言回覆

Taiwan's Prosecutors Continue to Abuse Their Power

Taiwan's prosecutors continue to abuse their power in the Chen Shui-bian case as they set out on yet another fishing expedition. They recently announced a fourth round of indictments (22 people) in Chen's case. So far they have called in just about anyone and everyone that ever shook hands with Chen or offered to buy him a cup of coffee.

Why are so many indicted? Despite having kept Chen in jail so long that he cannot prepare a proper defense, the prosecutors do not have a solid case of their own. They need to continue fishing. They need to find someone who they can threaten, bully or cajole to at least forge or fabricate a story to comply with their position. Or they hope by constant indictments to force Chen to bargain with them.

Contrast this abuse of power by prosecutors with three of the most obvious pan-blue cases. First there is the flagrant open and shut case of ex-legislator Diane Lee who illegally ripped Taiwan's taxpayers off of some US$3 million. Lee has never spent a day in jail; Lee still enjoys the money. None of her bank accounts have been frozen. Lee has two passports and can easily skip the country with either one. Yet as she continues to spend the taxpayer's money, Lee's prosecutors are debating whether they should even charge her for anything. Further what about the many members of Lee's family, relations and fellow KMT party who knew of her duplicity. Chen's case is in its fourth round of indictments. Why then have none ever been indicted or even called in for questioning in Lee's case?

Contrast this with the fact that only one person (a lowly secretary) went to jail in the money-laundering case of Ma Ying-jeou. This man went to jail for nine months for putting about a half a million US dollars in Ma's bank account. The mind boggles when the public is asked to believe that one lone secretary is the only perpetrator guilty of all this corruption and not even for his own pocket. Why has Ma been able to funnel money into his personal and private "non-profit" foundation?

Contrast this with James Soong found guilty three times of similar money-laundering and corruption. Yet surprisingly Soong never spent a day in jail and no one else was indicted along with him? Soong only paid back taxes on lesser amounts. In all of this, what of the fact that ironically Soong has never had a job in the past decade.

How does a man without work for over a decade finance two costly political campaigns for the presidency and one for mayor of Taipei? Or were those campaigns also fronts for money laundering? Why has no one else ever been indicted in Soong's cases? Where has Soong gotten all the money for his campaigns, his property in the USA and his numerous bank accounts?

There is no question that a large sum of money has been moved in the Chen case; but large and larger sums of money have always been moved from Taiwan since 1949 when the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) fled China. With Taiwan's vague and loose laws on campaign contributions and special allowance funds etc. the issue remains why is it illegal for one person of one party and not for the thousands of others who have consistently done it before and continue to do it. Not only that, the KMT dominated Legislative Yuan has recently floated the idea that they want to change the laws so it can be done legally but this will happen only after they have persecuted Chen. All this is in the name of fighting corruption. Diogenes left town a long time ago.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




包公在台灣檢察官當中徘徊徒勞
Jerome F. Keating Ph.D. 譯者 / 洪萱芳2010/01/03
當台灣的檢察官啟動另一波渾水摸魚似的尋找罪證,針對陳水扁案,繼續濫用公權力。他們最近公佈陳案第四波的起訴名單 (約有 22 人)。到目前為止,他們已經傳訊幾乎所有曾經跟陳水扁握過手,或是請他喝過咖啡的人到案訊問。

為什麼有這麼多人被起訴呢?儘管已經將陳拘禁在牢裡這麼久,使他無法好好準備對其有利的辯護證詞,檢察官至今還是沒有一個證據充足的案件。他們當然必須要繼續渾水摸魚。他們必須找到一個他們可以威脅利誘的人,來迫使其至少能夠能編造或杜撰一個跟他們立場一致說詞。或者他們其實希望要用持續不斷起訴的手段,迫使陳能夠跟他們達成協議。

我們比較陳案之檢察官濫用權力的情況,和三件最明顯的泛藍案件。第一件是前立法委員李慶安罪惡昭彰極易明瞭的案件,其以非法的手段剽竊台灣納稅人美金三百萬的稅金。李慶安從未坐過一天牢獄;她還在享用這筆錢。她沒有任何一個銀行帳戶遭到凍結。她現在正擁有雙重國籍,能夠使用其中一本護照,匆匆秘密?國。然而,李慶安一面花用納稅人的金錢,另一面檢察官卻仍在辯論是否該控告她任何罪名。不僅如此,對於很多早已知道李慶安雙重國籍身分的家人、親屬好友、以及同黨同志,又該如何處置呢?陳水扁的案子已經進入第四波的起訴。為什麼李案到現在仍沒有任何人被起訴,被傳訊到案,或以共謀關係訊問呢?

再與馬英九的洗錢案中事實上只有一個人入獄 (一位低職等的秘書)相比較。這個人因為將約五十萬美金放到馬的私人銀行帳戶,而入獄九個月。非常令人難以置信的是,社會大眾竟被要求相信這個秘書是唯一的罪犯,還要為不是放入他自己口袋裡的金錢,背負所有的貪汙罪名。但為什麼馬和李慶安一樣,也可以將錢集中到他私人帳戶以及所謂的 「非營利」 基金會呢?

再跟宋楚瑜三次相類似的洗錢案和貪汙罪被判定有罪的案件來比較。宋出人意外並未在牢裡待過一天,而且沒有任何其他人跟他一起被起訴。宋只以輕罪繳回其所逃漏的稅額。在這當中,最諷刺的事實就是,宋在過去十年中從未工作,沒領過薪水,但是生活無憂無慮。

但一個在過去十年沒有任何工作的人,要如何負擔二次總統和一次台北市長選舉昂貴的選戰呢?或者這些選戰也是洗錢的前哨站?為何沒有任何人在宋的案件中被起訴呢?究竟宋的競選基金,美國的置產,以及數個銀行帳戶的存款,是怎麼得來的呢?

在陳的案件中,大筆的金錢匯到海外是毫無疑問的,然而自從 1949 年國民黨逃離中國之後,一直有大筆大筆的金錢從台灣匯往海外。在台灣鬆散且渾沌不明的選舉獻金及特別費的規範下,主要的問題一直都是,為什麼這些做法在某一政黨的某一個人身上是違法的,而對其他曾經做過且繼續同樣做法的千百人,卻是無罪的!不僅如此,國民黨所主導的立法院,最近傳?一個想要修訂現行法律好讓金錢可以合法匯往海外的消息,只是這個法律修訂必須在他們迫害陳水扁之後才能啟動。所有這些事都是以反貪污為名。包公歸來乎?馬無法,馬無天!

(譯者為北卡大學特殊教育系博士班學生,原文請見http://zen.sandiego.edu:8080/Jerome
回頂端
檢視會員個人資料 發送私人訊息
sunshine
版面管理員


註冊時間: 2007-09-22
文章: 1909

發表發表於: 星期四 一月 07, 2010 10:21 am    文章主題: 引言回覆

Taiwan Up,” More Ineptness Ahead for 2010?
Jerome F. Keating Ph.D.

Even though Dubai now claims the world’s tallest operative building, Taipei 101 (having held that boast for 5 years) still stands proud and tall over the city of Taipei. Proud and tall, that is, except for one item, the unfortunate glowing lights spelling out “Taiwan Up” on its façade. ‘Taiwan Up,’ who came up with that embarrassing inept slogan?

All sorts of connotations come to mind. Reverse it and you have the insulting “Up Taiwan” or the sexual connotation in, “Can’t you get it up.” Then there is someone talking to their dog, “Up boy, up!” or Superman saying “Up, up and away.” All are part of the language, but “Taiwan Up” is not.

It’s not that people don’t understand what the Chinglish expression means. Certainly people understand it just as they do when someone here says, “I very like that show.” Or “he is a happiness man” etc. etc. But it is taking Chinese grammar rules and applying them to English, and for a city that is trying to claim respectability for being an international city, it just doesn’t fly, or shall we say “get it up.”

Not only is the phrase inept, but worse yet, Taipei Mayor Hau, and President Ma Ying-jeou were caught on camera proudly marching along chanting, “Taiwan Up. Taiwan Up.” Now there is one for Ma’s PR and image making team to handle, an inept president and an inept mayor delighting in using an inept phrase. Does that tell you something about the fashioned image of the Harvard educated Ma who is always touted as being a lawyer except for the fact that he never passed the bar exam anywhere? Keep that image up boys. It may be the only thing you have going for you.

In typical fashion, some of the city fathers tried to pass the buck and say that they ran the slogan by their consultants Ogilvy & Mather and they approved it. If true, I would do two things, first cancel the contract with Ogilvy et al; you don’t need to pay big bucks to a company if that is all they can come up with. And second I would sack the person who hired them. If not true, and if I were Ogilvy, I would set about denying it as quickly as possible. This is not something an upbeat company wanting to claim international savvy wants floating around. And it is not something you can try to stonewall with a brave front.

Well, time’s up! King Pu-tsung put this high up on your list of things to do, that is, after you get through explaining and/or putting a glowing image on how Ma botched up his promise of an up-economy, Typhoon Morokat, the US beef imports, and the opaque yet allegedly transparent ECFA. After hitting bottom with such ineptness, the only way you can go is up.


Other writings can be found at http://zen.sandiego.edu:8080/Jerome
回頂端
檢視會員個人資料 發送私人訊息
sunshine
版面管理員


註冊時間: 2007-09-22
文章: 1909

發表發表於: 星期四 一月 07, 2010 10:27 am    文章主題: 引言回覆

December 28,2009
台灣和日本相互援助的和平需要( Jerome F. Keating Ph.D.)
譯者 / TOTTORO

沒有人曾經為所謂的 「台灣海峽兩岸現狀」 下過定義,無論是實際上的、過去曾有過的、或理論上應該有的定義,但大家都在談論它。因此,大家就繼續認為有所謂的 「海峽兩岸現狀」,並且還受到眾人的支持 (包括和平的認定在內)。儘管如此,中國定期增加瞄準台灣的飛彈數量,從事軍事威脅和制定反分裂法,並監禁國內每一位倡導異議的民運人士。為了符合這個虛構的現狀,馬政府控管下的台灣,認為台灣的 2300 萬人民應該支配自己的命運,但馬政府始終忽略人民的意見,而且目前正強迫他們接受不透明的 ECFA,並醞釀統一政策。至於美國,必要表態的時候,只顧慮中國的市場,聲稱台灣地位未定,在行動上忽略任何台灣人意見的參與。所以,我們到底應該怎麼辦?




所謂 「海峽兩岸現狀」 的說詞中,如果和平與穩定真的是人人都想達到的目標,那麼現在就是釐清說詞的時候了。取而代之,我在此建議兩個說來也許驚人,但是直截了當且必須推行的建議。

首先,如果永久的和平真的是所有人的希求,那麼台灣的民主,絕對不容許被破壞過圖博和新疆文化的貪婪的中國所摧殘殆盡。絕不可是一個虛構的、誤導的現狀,而必需是台灣的民主,才能作為解決永久和平方案的必要條件。

台灣的民主為什麼這麼重要?「海峽兩岸」 問題的根源,自始至今,一直都起因於中國霸權的好戰意圖。即使他們嘗試戴上假面具,也掩飾不了在中國經濟成長中的排外愛國主義裡,根本沒有所謂的「和平崛起」。相反的,我們所看到的,其實是被滿洲王國征服了半世紀以上,自尊受傷所刺激而來的野心。我們還看到一個共產黨內的小集團 (政治局),依賴不透明的獨裁統治來控制、和洗腦它的寵僕,剷除異己,並把人民對中國內部腐敗和霸道的憎恨,引導向外岀氣。

台灣的民主不斷揭露中國陰謀集團霸道的謊言,因為台灣也曾經被一個具有類似野心的類似陰謀集團,以類似的政令宣傳控制超過了四十年。儘管如此,台灣的人民還是設法克服並熬過了獨裁專制。台灣的民主其實像一面明鏡,證明政治改革是可能發生的。

把台灣當成一面借鏡其實還是不夠。當中共當局繼續壓迫的同時,和平的第二個要素 (也許看來很奇怪),不是美國那種軟弱而且不誠心誠意,只根據台灣關係法提供小型防禦性武器。如果真正要和平,台灣的和平鄰居 — 日本 — 必須裝備核子武器。這是什麼意思?提供核子武器給日本這個戰後政策不准擁有、生產,甚至不允許核子武器存在其領土上的國家?是的,改變這一個政策,此其時也。

這是核武擴增嗎?在某種程度上沒錯,但看看現實吧。中國已經持續在亞洲擴增核武。是中國供應巴基斯坦核武器來對付中國未來潛在敵人印度的核武。中國幫助北韓發展核武,為的是對抗中國的宿敵日本。在另一條戰線上,也一直是中國在協助伊朗的核武活動。而現在中國正覬覦台灣,為的是要完成中國深海海域的海軍霸權,並控制在東海和南海間的海域通道。

有些人的思維仍然停留在擔憂日本的 1940 年代,但二戰結束已經超過半世紀 (準確說是 67 年)。戰後,日本在亞洲一直是最和平、而且是最負責任的國家之一。如果它擁有核子武器,日本亦會是少數幾個會最讓中國忌憚的國家之一。日本比美國在亞洲的安全更攸關重大,日本也比美國更了解中國的性格和野心。

「台灣海峽兩岸現狀」 虛幻不實的說詞仍然會繼續。美國和中國在玩文字遊戲,到底什麼是 「一個中國」,什麼是 「承認中國的立場」。這些遊戲可以繼續下去,但是如果要在台灣海峽有真正的和平,不是核武美國,而必需是一個有武核裝備的日本,才能提供和平的戰略平衡。

(譯者為美國威斯康辛大學病毒學博士後研究人員,原文刊在 http://zen.sandiego.edu:8080/Jerome
回頂端
檢視會員個人資料 發送私人訊息
sunshine
版面管理員


註冊時間: 2007-09-22
文章: 1909

發表發表於: 星期三 一月 13, 2010 8:06 am    文章主題: 引言回覆

Taiwan, January: As the World Turns
Jerome F. Keating Ph.D.

Saturday January 9, 2010, was a clean sweep for the DPP as it took the three Legislative Yuan positions that were up for re-election when vacated because of among other things previous KMT vote-buying. Ma’s new spin-doctor KMT Secretary-General King Pu-tsung is going to be working overtime to try and put a positive spin on this one. All three positions had been KMT held. More by-elections in February, but the immediate damage is that the DPP now has more than ¼ of the Legislative positions and can officially challenge the President in legislative matters.

Last week Ma’s KMT dominated Legislative Yuan (LY) voted against his US beef protocol agreement; a bad sign for the President when his own party even turns against him. But the heavy-handed, secret dealings of Ma were too much even for them. Premier Wu Den-yih said that they “assumed” that people would just go along and support their patronizing paternalism. Unfortunately that is not what participative democracy is all about. Bookies are taking bets on whether they will learn from this.

Wu continued, “Following that lesson, the government will use plain language when talking to the public about the ECFA.” Come again?? So far the government has not used any language, let alone plain language in explaining ECFA. No one knows what is in this alleged “transparent” package. All Ma’s people have said so far is, “We have a blank check for the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and we want you to sign it.”

Trouble in River City?? Last week, the Control Yuan censured the Taipei City Government for granting permission in 2006 to construct buildings over 10-stories near the President’s Residence. For those wondering what this is about, a new building, the23 story, I Pin Building, will be completed this year. President Ma’s people have complained about this since among other things, it gave greater opportunity for shall we say assassins with high-powered rifles to use the height of the buildings to target the President. Taipei Mayor Hau Lung-bin said the city may have granted the permission, but it was not on his watch. What? Yes in 2006, Ma Ying-jeou was Mayor of Taipei and Chen Shui-bian was living in the President’s Residence. Is this karma?

What else? Round Two of the trial of former President Chen Shui-bian on corruption charges began with his appeal. There will be more on this.

So the world turns in Taiwan. Now the longest running US TV Soap Opera As the World Turns is scheduled to end in 2010, but in Taiwan the world is sure to keep on turning with never a dull moment.


Other writings can be found at http://zen.sandiego.edu:8080/Jerome
回頂端
檢視會員個人資料 發送私人訊息
sunshine
版面管理員


註冊時間: 2007-09-22
文章: 1909

發表發表於: 星期三 一月 13, 2010 8:40 am    文章主題: 引言回覆

Emperor Ma Rules by Fiat, So Why is No One Listening?
Jerome F. Keating Ph.D.

The more one watches Ma Ying-jeou’s distant management style, the more one thinks of Swift’s floating island of Laputa in his satire, Gulliver’s Travels. From high above, the king of the floating island communicates with his subjects down below via written orders, directives and messages lowered in a basket. His subjects must respond in kind placing requests and petitions in the basket to be hauled up for consideration. Swift is satirizing the Hanover King George I of England who did not speak the language of the people and preferred to rule from afar (Germany to be exact). Ma of course does speak a faltering Taiwanese, but his mind is not on Taiwan. It’s elsewhere dreaming of restoring the mythic Republic of China that never lost the Civil War and still rules China by its 1947 Constitution.

Unfortunately despite the many messages Ma sends down in a basket, most are not picking up the cues. Observe the following. Ma sent down the message about the great deal he made for the nation by inking a beef import agreement with the United States. Of course he did it by fiat without consultation. So somehow the Legislative Yuan (LY) sent the wrong message back up.

Then there is the strange message that Ma keeps sending down that everything in his administration is transparent. Transparent like ECFA where Ma’s man Chiang Pin-kung of the Straits Exchange Foundation (SEF) refused to address the LY on it. Premier Wu Den-yih refused to debate, explain or say anything about it. He passed the buck to the Ministry of Economics that also said nothing. And finally after all the negotiations, brouhaha and signatures, no one is sure what is in it and what are the benefits and costs to the nation. Never has anything so transparent been so opaque. Not to worry, Ma has sent another message that government agencies must explain it all to the people.

What about national sovereignty? Ma has continually sent down the message that he will defend the nation’s sovereignty to the end. Nevertheless he pushes the nation into economic dependency on the People’s Republic of China (PRC), and prevents the nation’s flag from being flown lest it be seen by and offend China’s Chen Yunlin when he visits. Further the people watched Ma acquiesce to be called Mr. Ma by the same Chen. Maybe Ma needs to lower messages in a basket to China.

Care for the people? Ma sent down a message that his administration is on top of things, always alert, and cares for the nation. Somehow the villages that were swept away with Typhoon Morakot didn’t get that message on time either.

The transparency message has consistently come down on other issues like police brutality, the erosion of justice etc. etc. And from 2005 on, Ma as Chairman of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), then as President, and again as Chairman of the KMT has repeatedly sent the message that the party will be transparent on how it “acquired” (read ‘stole’) the national assets and how it will give them back. It is 2010 now isn’t it? Can anyone cut through that transparency?

Issue after issue, time after time, Ma keeps sending down messages in a basket. Don’t worry; he is fixing ties with the USA and Japan. Yes, justice will be dispensed equally to members of all parties. Ignore the fact that Diane Lee still walks the streets enjoying her US$ 3 million dollars and Changhua’s convicted Pai Hung-shen was able to just walk away from his police guard. As for the people, referendums are the people’s right to express their views, but Ma doesn’t want to hear their voice just yet. And so Ma sits in his heavens sending down the message that all is right with the world and with Taiwan. The only problem is that the people are not reading his messages, that’s all. I guess they think it is still a democracy.


Other writings can be found at http://zen.sandiego.edu:8080/Jerome
回頂端
檢視會員個人資料 發送私人訊息
sunshine
版面管理員


註冊時間: 2007-09-22
文章: 1909

發表發表於: 星期日 一月 17, 2010 11:40 pm    文章主題: 引言回覆

Friedman Leaves Me Cold, Flat, and Disgusted
Jerome F. Keating Ph.D.

Between the known and the unknown, falls the shadow. Between the surface and reality falls the guess. Between what can be controlled and what cannot, falls the wish. Between the shadow, the guess, and the wish, comes the consultant, a shadowy seller of guesses striving to say truisms that the wishers want to hear. Thomas Friedman, The World is Flat (2005) and the World is Hot, Flat, and Crowded (2008), recently graced the shores of Taiwan, and demonstrated this process. Unfortunately the more one listens to him, the more one wonders how he ever became a three-time Pulitzer Prize winner. Or better yet, what judgment standards does the Pulitzer Prize Board have? In the 14 Journalistic categories awarded only to paid entrants, does cleverness trump content? Does style trump substance?

As Friedman played on truisms and generalities to Taiwan’s audience, his success more than demonstrated again the impoverished ability in listening logic of his audiences around the world. They wish for the quick-fix of truisms and control that will also make them rich. Here, playing a double entendre with racial overtones, Friedman let his audience in on a “big secret, there are too many Americans in the world today.” He both condemned and advocated a flat world where everyone has a consumptive American lifestyle.

The audience came to hear Friedman because they wished an answer to control their future and become rich. They ate it up. Friedman made them feel that they deserved this lifestyle more than the wasteful Americans. Somehow however, they did not make the connection that what they wanted was that condemned consumptive American lifestyle and that Friedman who lives in palatial digs, getting paid an estimated US$75,000 per lecture, was the quintessential “American.” By example more than words, Friedman showed he is one that the planet is not “designed for.”

In America, Friedman had preached conflicting truisms. Don’t worry that your jobs are out-sourced; just upgrade your skills and all will be well. At the same time he advocated that Americans open their borders to the world’s talent so that they can come and compete for the decreasing jobs which the Americans with upgraded skills would be seeking. Filling a decreasing demand with untold supply does not compute.

In Taiwan Friedman cleverly spoke the words of praise that the government wanted to hear. Taiwan was a nation that “drilled its people and not its ground.” It “unlocked their creativity and talent etc.” but somehow his words did not match the reality that the talent of the nation was running off to Shanghai and foreign markets. He continued that countries that drill the ground and not their people are those countries that tend to be authoritarian; they sacrifice freedom for production. Ironically this also did not compute with how Taiwan’s government was pushing greater and greater linkage and investment in the master authoritarian state across the Strait.

Despite this, Friedman marveled at how Taiwan which was supposedly a flashpoint in the world thirteen years ago under the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) could maintain peace without much shuttle diplomacy and US intervention. He missed the reality that nations do not always need US intervention to manage the world. Further he missed the point that the only real cause of the flashpoint was and still is a grasping autocratic China. Just because Taiwan has temporarily acquiesced to its authoritarian neighboring bully, does not mean that the flashpoint has gone away. In this convoluted context, Friedman, (no doubt here at the Taiwan Government Information Office’s expense) suggested that Taiwan’s President Ma Ying-jeou and China’s Hu Jin-tao should somehow get the Nobel Peace Prize.

Friedman’s ability to milk audiences and talk on both sides of the fence is reminiscent of another master at that trade, Ezra Vogel. Vogel, a Harvard academic wrote Japan as No. 1, (1979) and rode the Japanese horse lecturing American businessmen on how they needed to imitate and learn from the Japanese system. Conversely of course he lectured the Japanese on how they should be proud to have such a great system. True to form, when that system imploded and the horse lost its legs, Vogel wrote another book, Is Japan Still No.1? (2001). Seeking a new horse Vogel lectured Japanese on how the system he had previously told everyone to imitate had self-defeating flaws. In turn, he lectured Americans that they should be thankful that they had strengths to overcome the Japanese self-defeating flaws. That is showmanship.

Right now Vogel is, and Friedman will soon be looking for a Chinese horse to keep them on the lecture circuit well into retirement. Reality will give them a challenge. How can they both disguise and sell China’s model of a non-transparent, autocratic, Machiavellian system? How do you sell it to the management and the workforce where it is not part of their culture? How do you promote and sell exploitation in exchange for an “American lifestyle?”


Other writings can be found at http://zen.sandiego.edu:8080/Jerome
回頂端
檢視會員個人資料 發送私人訊息
sunshine
版面管理員


註冊時間: 2007-09-22
文章: 1909

發表發表於: 星期五 一月 22, 2010 10:25 am    文章主題: 引言回覆

The KMT’s Sordid History Re-lives itself on Taiwan under Ma Ying-jeou
Jerome F. Keating Ph.D.

The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is a past master of fat-cat positions and bought loyalties. Who can not help but remember the inequalities of its forced forty year one-party state rule of Taiwan. Who cannot help but remember how while promoting the ruse of being pro-democracy the KMT guaranteed party members lucrative lifelong positions in the Legislative Yuan (LY). After it lost China’s Civil War, the KMT retreated to Taiwan in 1949. Party members elected to the LY in 1947, never had to face another election until 1992 when Lee Teng-hui finally cleaned house. Most LY members by that time had either died or were ready to retire with fat pensions. Is the past, the past? Not on your life.

On Tuesday January 19, 2010, the KMT-dominated legislature forced 30 votes in 70 minutes against opposition to push through a disputed amendment to the Local Government Act. The amendment applied to the coming year-end elections for the five new special municipalities. Under the amendment the current incumbents chosen in 2005 would hold their positions as district heads until 2014. These positions would normally be appointed by the new special municipality mayors to be elected in December 2010.

In effect what was happening is that no matter who would be elected as the special municipality mayors (either KMT or DPP), 56 incumbent district heads would owe their jobs to the KMT dominated legislature and not the new mayors elected by the people. Normally the new mayors (elected in December) would not have the power to appoint people they can trust to these positions.

This is a new tactic by the KMT to subvert the wishes of the people. They have been losing elections lately and are getting worried. Several corrupt KMT legislators have lost their jobs and the people have surprisingly elected DPP legislators in their place.

Taiwan’s KMT president, Ma Ying-jeou as usual, sat on the sidelines nodding approval while others carried out his wishes. In the crucial upcoming December elections regardless of the results, he would have 56 incumbent township heads in key areas and they would owe him their jobs. They would know that without campaigning, they now had guaranteed positions until 2014. If they wanted these people could simply sit in their offices, drink tea and collect their salaries. Democratically, the citizens of Taiwan could do nothing.

However, while the citizens of Taiwan can do nothing about this heavy handedness in the Legislative Yuan, they can use their democratic right to do something. They can vote out all future KMT candidates in the Legislative by-elections in February and vote out KMT candidates in the December year –end special municipality mayoral elections. That at least will start to right the abuses of the past and level the playing field.


Other writings can be found at http://zen.sandiego.edu:8080/Jerome
回頂端
檢視會員個人資料 發送私人訊息
sunshine
版面管理員


註冊時間: 2007-09-22
文章: 1909

發表發表於: 星期五 一月 22, 2010 10:26 am    文章主題: 引言回覆

一月台灣:變動的世界( Jerome F. Keating Ph.D.) 譯者 / 藍唯文

2010年1月9日星期六,有三個立法委員席次,因為之前國民黨候選人涉嫌買票以致當選無效,需要補選,結果民進黨獲得全勝。那三個立法委員席次原本由國民黨掌握。馬英九的策士金溥聰,新上任國民黨秘書長,忙著加班,想辦法要把這件全軍覆沒的敗選,坳成對國民黨有利情況。二月還有更多的立委補選,但當下國民黨受創,就是民進黨現在立法院的席次,超過四分之一以上,可以正式在立法議題上挑戰總統的權力。



馬英九的國民黨掌控的立法院,於1月5日投票反對馬的美國牛肉進口草案。這對馬英九來說是個不良徵兆,因為連他自己的黨都轉取敵對態度。但馬英九拙劣秘密的處事手段,他們自己人也無法同意。行政院長吳敦義說,他們 「以為」 人民會同意並支持他們一派施恩態度的仁慈專制政治。但不幸的是,這不是人民作主的民主國家該有的做法。已經有人開始下注打賭,看他們是否會因此得到教訓。

吳敦義還說:「由於美國牛的前車之鑑,政府將用淺顯易懂的言語來向民眾說明有關 ECFA 的議題。」 又來這一套了嗎?到目前為止,政府還沒有用任何言語來解釋 ECFA,更不用說甚麼 「淺顯易懂」 了。沒有任何人知道這個所謂「透明」 的協議到底是甚麼。目前所有馬團隊說的就是,我們給中華人民共和國開了一張空白支票,要你們來背書。

台北當局正面臨困境嗎?上星期,監察院譴責台北市政府 2006 年批准在總統官邸附近建造十層以上的高樓。想知道這件事的人,讓我解釋一下,這棟 23 層新建的高樓,叫作 〈一品苑〉,將於今年完工。馬英九的人已經在抱怨,因為其中一個顧慮,說起來就是怕有殺手利用高樓的高度,用強力狙擊步槍暗殺總統。台北市長郝龍斌說,或許市府真的有批准這個申請,但不是在他任內發生的。那是甚麼話?是的,是 2006 年,當時台北市長是馬英九,住在總統官邸的是陳水扁。這是國民黨 「因福得禍」,自作自受的因果報應嗎?

還有甚麼呢?前總統陳水扁涉嫌貪汙案,二審隨著他的上訴開始,未來會有更多發展。

所以我們看到台灣變動的世界了。美國歷時最久的電視連續劇 〈變動的世界〉(As the World Turns) 將在 2010 年推出完結篇,但台灣這個世界,劇情仍會繼續活躍變換,不會有冷場。

(譯者從事語文與教育工作,原文刊在 http://zen.sandiego.edu:8080/Jerome
回頂端
檢視會員個人資料 發送私人訊息
sunshine
版面管理員


註冊時間: 2007-09-22
文章: 1909

發表發表於: 星期六 一月 23, 2010 6:48 am    文章主題: 引言回覆

「馬皇」用命令治國,那麽為什麽沒人聽從?(作者 / Jerome F. Keating Ph.D. ) 譯者 / 洪萱芳

對馬英九冷漠疏遠的管理方式越加觀察,就越會發現,其實這就是斯威夫特 (Swift) 諷刺文學中格列佛遊記 (Gulliver’s Travels) 所描寫的天空之城 – 拉普他島 (Laputa)。站在高處,天空之城的國王從高空用吊藍落下書面命令,指令,欲傳遞之訊息,和其臣民溝通。他的臣民必須用同樣的方式,將他們的請求或訴願放在吊籃中,拉上呈給國王裁決。斯威夫特意在諷刺英國漢諾威國王喬治一世 (Hanover King George I),不懂得如何講人民的語言,寧願選擇從遠處治理國家 (就是德國)。馬當然會講顫慄結巴的台語,但是他的心並不在台灣。他的心在別處,夢想恢復從未輸過內戰,且仍以 1947 年憲法統治中國的那個荒唐無稽的中華民國。


很不幸地,儘管馬用吊籃傳遞了許多訊息,大多數人並未注意到他給的暗示。注意以下這個情況。馬傳遞著他與美國簽定美牛協議這個偉大交易的訊息。當然他未經商議就以命令方式做成決議。因此不知怎麼地,立法院也回報了錯誤的訊息。

當時馬持續地傳遞一個奇怪的訊息,說他的政府所做的任何決定都是公開透明的。公開透明到連馬政府的官員,海基會董事長江炳坤拒絕在立法院討論 ECFA 的詳細內容。行政院長吳敦義拒絕辯論、解釋或對此做任何説明。他將責任推給經濟部,而他們仍舊不做任何解釋。在所有協商、喧鬧和協議簽署之後,竟沒有人能夠確定簽署內容為何,以及對國家帶來的利益和所必須付出的代價為何。從沒見過有任何公開透明的資訊是可以如此混沌不明且難以理解的。不必擔心,馬已又傳遞了一個他的政府官員必得向人民解釋的訊息。

他的國家主權説法如何?馬一向所傳遞的訊息,就是他會捍衛國家主權到最後關頭。然而他卻將國家推往經濟依賴中國的路線,且禁止國旗飄揚在任何中國的陳雲林所到之處,惟恐被他看到而冒犯到他。台灣人民甚至看到馬同意讓這位陳姓中國人稱呼他為馬先生。也或許他必須將他的訊息放到吊籃裡,傳遞到中國去。

至於他對人民關心嗎?馬傳遞了他的行政團隊認真行事的消息,總是很警覺事情發展,且很關心國民。但不知怎麼回事,這個團隊卻似乎也被莫拉克颱風席捲而走,受到災害的村莊並未準時接到關心人民的訊息。

他對其他的議題,如警察暴力,司法腐敗等等,所傳遞的訊息,也持續説是公開透明。2005 年以來,從馬擔任國民黨黨主席,接著擔任總統,又再接任國民黨黨主席,他所重覆傳遞的訊息就是,其政黨將會在如何 「取得」﹝可解讀為 「盜用」﹞ 黨產以及如何歸還黨產的議題上,以公開透明的方法處理。現在已經是 2010 年了,不是嗎?有任何人能夠揭穿這個公開透明的内幕嗎?

一個議題接著一個議題,一次又一次,馬持續的用吊籃傳下他的訊息。不用擔心:他正在修復和美國及日本的關係。是的,對各黨政治人物而言,司法會公平對待各政黨人物。他要人民對李慶安還逍遙自在的在外頭享用她約美金三百萬元的非法所得,及彰化縣已被定罪的白鴻森竟可以從警方看守中輕易潛逃之事實置之不理。至於人民,公投本應是人民表達意見之權力,但馬還不想聽到他們的聲音。因此馬坐在他的天堂樂園,傳遞訊息,為世界和台灣粉飾太平。唯一的問題在於,人民並沒有接收他的訊息罷了。我猜想,他們認為這一切仍舊可算做民主。


(譯者為北卡大學綠堡分校特殊教育系博士班學生, 原文登於 http://zen.sandiego.edu:8080/Jerome)



回頂端
檢視會員個人資料 發送私人訊息
sunshine
版面管理員


註冊時間: 2007-09-22
文章: 1909

發表發表於: 星期五 一月 29, 2010 8:11 am    文章主題: 引言回覆

January 26,2010
令人厭惡的佛里曼效應

(Jerome F. Keating Ph.D.) 譯者 / 藍唯文

在已知和未知之間,有灰暗;在表像與真實之間,有猜測;在可控制與不可控制之間,有渴望;在灰暗、猜測和渴望之間,則有諮詢者,一個兜售猜度的幽靈銷售員,盡力獻動能使渴望者悅耳恭聼的常理。《世界是平的The World is Flat》(2005) 和 《世界是熱的、平的,又擁擠的 The World is Hot, Flat and Crowded》(2008) 的作者佛里曼 (Thomas L. Friedman),最近風風光光的來到台灣,就展示了他這種拿手的行術。不幸的是,你越聽他說,就會越懷疑他的三次普立茲獎 Pulitzer Prize 是怎麼得來的。或更妥當的問,就是普立茲獎董事會的評定標準到底在哪裡?在十四個新聞類別裡,只頒給付費參賽的專業作者,難道伶牙俐齒勝過內容?寫作風格勝過實質?

正當佛里曼對台灣聽眾玩弄常理和通盤概論的文字遊戲時,他的成功比再次呈現他全世界的聽衆,聽解邏輯能力的貧乏,更爲嚴重。他們期望得到一個快速解決的方法和掌控力來致富。佛里曼卻拿自己美國人開玩笑,引導聽眾領略他種族暗示的雙關用意:「有一個只有少數人知道的秘密,今日世界上美國人太多」。他既譴責又倡導一個平的世界,在這個世界裡,每個人都過著美國的消費生活方式。

聽眾來聽佛里曼演講,是希望聽到一個可以自我掌控未來並獨力致富的答案。他們囫圇吞棗相信他那一套。佛里曼讓聽眾覺得他們比浪費的美國人更值得享受美國的生活方式。但不知怎麼的,這些聽眾卻連貫不起來,他們想要的其實就是那被譴責的美國式消費生活,而住在豪華公寓,每場演講都賺約七萬五千美金的佛里曼,正是最典型的 「美國人」。不用多說,從他的表現就可以看出,這個星球並不適合佛里曼這樣的人種生存。

在美國,佛里曼一直都在倡導相互衝突的常理。他說,別擔心你的工作被外包,只要你提升自己的能力,一切就沒問題。但同時,他也支持美國要開放讓全世界的人才進來,讓他們也能進入美國市場與能力提升了的美國人,一起競爭逐漸減少的工作機會。但事實是,用無限的供應來填補逐漸降低的需求,總賬是入不敷出的。

在台灣,佛里曼很有技巧的編造政府想聽的讚揚言語。他說台灣是一個 「培養人才但不濫用土地」 的國家;台灣也 「開發人民的創造力和才能等等」。但是他所說的似乎與事實上這個國家的人才奔向上海和外國市場不相符合。他接著說,濫用土地而不開發人才的國家,大多屬於極權國家;他們會為了生產力而犧牲自由。諷刺的是,這跟台灣政府在催促與海峽對岸的極權主腦作更多關連與投資的做法,也不相符合。

儘管如此,佛里曼很驚異,十三年前在國民黨統治下,台灣原本可能是世界的一個戰爭爆發點,卻能在沒有外交和美國的干預下維持和平。他忘了一個事實,國家不總是需要美國的介入才能處理世界事務。他更忘了那個戰爭爆發點唯一真正的起因,從以前到現在,都是貪婪專制的中國。即使台灣現階段暫時默從這個獨裁的流氓鄰居,並不表示這個戰爭爆發點已經消失。在這樣盤根錯節的複雜情況下,佛里曼 (不用懷疑,他是台灣政府新聞局花錢請來的) 還建議,台灣的馬英九總統和中國的胡錦濤應該設法授予諾貝爾和平獎。

佛里曼這樣榨取讀者又能左右逢源黑白通吃的能力,讓人想起另一個同行大師,美國哈佛大學學者傅高義 (Ezra Vogel)。他撰寫的 《日本第一 Japan as No. 1》(1979),騎著日本馬,教導美國企業家怎麼模仿學習日本人的商業體系。另一方面,他也告訴日本人要以這麼棒的體系自豪。事有事主,當這個體系內爆,馬沒了腳,他就寫了另一本書 《日本還是第一嗎 Is Japan still No. 1?》(2001)。為了找一匹新的馬騎,傅高義又教導日本人,之前他要每個人模仿的體系,有自我挫敗的缺陷。反過來,他也告訴美國人,應該感激自己有能力克服日本體系缺陷。對我來說,那就是百出花招的推銷術。

現在,傅高義正騎著中國馬 (編按:他目前正在研究鄧小平及其對中國近代改革的貢獻),佛里曼也很快會找一匹中國馬,繼續他們的巡迴演講,直到他們退休爲止。但現實必定會向他們挑戰。因為,他們兩人怎麼可能掩飾並推銷中國不透明、專制獨裁又充滿詭詐權謀的體系呢?你怎麼可能把這樣的系統介紹給不含這種文化的管理體系與勞工團體呢?你又怎麼可能用推銷剝削的文化,來換取 「美國的生活方式」 呢?

(譯者從事語文與教育工作,原文刊在 http://zen.sandiego.edu:8080/Jerome
回頂端
檢視會員個人資料 發送私人訊息
sunshine
版面管理員


註冊時間: 2007-09-22
文章: 1909

發表發表於: 星期五 一月 29, 2010 8:25 am    文章主題: 引言回覆

Taiwan, As the World Turns under Ma Ying-joke: the Great Panda Fiasco
Jerome F. Keating Ph.D.

The soap opera of life in Taiwan continues under its so-called President, Ma the Incompetent, a.k.a. Ma Ying-joke. People no longer commiserate about the joke of his 6-3-3 campaign promise. Nor do they even mention the joke of his promise that his great rapprochement with China would bring over 3,000 well-heeled, free-spending Chinese per day to turn Taiwan’s economy around. From that all Taiwan got were loud mouth pikers who when they weren’t spitting on the sidewalks were trying to stiff restaurants because they didn’t bring much money. The latest sad thing that makes people wonder “Why did we ever believe him?” is the great panda fiasco.

Recall a short time ago when Ma in his on-going efforts to Sinicize Taiwan and take away its identity was going to make Taiwan a center for panda research. As if Taiwan had nothing better to spend its tax-payer money on than seeing how pandas can live outside of their natural habitat? Taiwan spent millions and millions of US$ dollars on this erstwhile project while recession hammered at the gates. The corresponding Ma promise was that this would bring all sorts of spin-off revenue from Taiwan’s public.

The results? It’s another Ma bust and time to send the pandas packing before they really become a financial burden! One year later we can now thankfully say that Taiwan may perhaps finally be seeing through the Ma hype. Most zoos report that in the first couple of years of the costly renting of pandas from China, spin-off profits are high but then the novelty wears off and profits peter out. Taiwan didn’t even get that. Further, the Taipei Zoo spent five times as much money on pandas than it did on penguins and the pandas inspired less than half the visitors the penguins did.

What is the next promise of money rolling in from Ma the Incompetent? The US says it will not re-negotiate the junk beef scandal Ma tried to sneak in the back door. That leaves the blank check ECFA Ma wants Taiwan taxpayers and industries to sign. So the world turns in Taiwan. Stay tuned, there is more coming.


Other writings can be found at http://zen.sandiego.edu:8080/Jerome
回頂端
檢視會員個人資料 發送私人訊息
sunshine
版面管理員


註冊時間: 2007-09-22
文章: 1909

發表發表於: 星期四 二月 04, 2010 10:01 pm    文章主題: 引言回覆

蔡英文之我見我思
一個外國人的觀點(Jerome F. Keating Ph.D.) 譯者 / 藍唯文

台灣人自己對民進黨主席蔡英文的領導風格,一直有各種不同的意見和評論。

我以非民進黨員的身份,想提供一個局外人對蔡主席的觀感,以及她的一些優點。我在幾個不同場合中遇見蔡英文,也聽過她對不同團體的演講。其中最特殊的團體是台灣外籍記者聯誼會,她現場用英語演講、回答提問,全程兩個小時,從頭到尾都不用草稿。

蔡英文精通英語,這是長久以來民進黨領導階層所明顯欠缺的,對他們而言是一種阻礙與損失 (我想這種缺陷有其歷史緣由)。雖説,英語對統治台灣或領導民進黨團沒有直接關係,但對民進黨在國外的形象與爭取友邦包括美國的支持,卻關係重大。

大多數的人都知道,馬英九經常受到美國媒體和決策者的厚待,因為他們看他是哈佛畢業生,而且他會說英語。當馬英九向華府提出他的計劃時,這是一個很大的賣點。另一方面,陳水扁在美國被形容成麻煩製造者 (我不同意這個批評),因為他永遠都沒辦法對美國的決策官員明確說明他的立場。

蔡英文的英語比馬英九的英語好得多。如果他們用英語辯論,蔡英文一定會讓馬英九無法脫困。同樣的,我認為蔡英文的倫敦政經學院博士學位讓她比馬英九更有能力領會世界事物。反觀馬英九,他雖然學過法律,卻從未在美國或台灣通過律師資格考試。

蔡英文已經拜訪過美國和日本,給兩個國家留下很好的印象。她能言善道,學識豐富,理解力強,親切又有理性。她確實可以減輕這兩個國家的憂慮,讓他們知道,台灣即使由在民進黨執政,他們無須憂心,會有他們可以信任的人。這是華府很關切的議題,因為他們擔心民進黨執政下的台灣會不安定 (姑且不論民進黨配不配這樣負面的聲譽,美日兩國的擔心是事實)。

需要加強支持台灣的西方世界裡,已經出現女性最高領袖,像英國前首相柴契爾夫人和德國現任總理梅克爾(有人說梅克爾衣着不整,個性也不夠熱情,但她激發人民的信賴和信心,所以被視為可靠的領袖)。

因此,從大處着眼,我與蔡英文會晤之後,對她產生信任和信心。我更相信,當她需要強硬行事的時候,她會堅毅不移。

假如她不照有些人的期望引爆爭端,民進黨員不應該苛責她。沒有人做事,能滿足所有人的期待。

以上是我在蔡英文身上看到的能力特質。相較之下,目前我並沒看到民進黨內有任何一個在上述領域裡可以與她相提並論的人。

(譯者從事語文與教育工作,原文刊在 http://zen.sandiego.edu:8080/Jerome
回頂端
檢視會員個人資料 發送私人訊息
sunshine
版面管理員


註冊時間: 2007-09-22
文章: 1909

發表發表於: 星期四 二月 11, 2010 3:44 am    文章主題: 引言回覆

Taiwan’s Double Standard of Justice and the “Dogs of Bias”
Jerome F. Keating Ph.D.

Taiwan’s former President Chen Shui-bian has been in jail since December 30, 2008 (over 400 days). The change in judges requested by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) to keep him there has extended his imprisonment for the third time. This time it is for two more months. His case reeks of the double standard that has never left Taiwan’s prosecutorial function and the courts since the one-party state days of the KMT. While Ma Ying-jeou’s former law professor Jerome Cohen and scores of professors have written open-letter after open-letter to point out these inconsistencies and erosion of justice, all the Minister of Justice (MOJ) and the Government Information Office (GIO) do is to laugh and try to create a veneer of legitimacy over Ma Ying-jeou’s government.

Let’s look behind the curtain. Taiwan has never had transitional justice; because of that the Ministry of Justice and the courts remain filled with left over prosecutors and judges from the privileged and lucrative one-party state days of the KMT. They still see the world with those jaundiced eyes, some perhaps even wanting to reconstruct the days of former privilege. Left over also from those glory days of the KMT is its lucrative system with its loose laws regarding special allowances for government officials as well as vague laws on what constitutes campaign donations/gift giving and the post election usage of those funds. It is a system built for money-laundering and corruption.

The combination of looseness and vagary of the laws give the prosecutors and courts extreme discretionary (and easily biased) powers in application. It is in that application where we begin to see the ease with which a double standard can be created and the reasons why for some, the prosecutors have gained themselves the name, “the dogs of bias.” Compare and contrast the following harsh treatment dealt Chen with the lackadaisical and lenient treatment shown Diane Lee, and other KMT and former KMT members.

Begin with a favorite James Soong; James Soong is a man who has not had a job since 1998; that is a long time to be out of work. Yet during that time, James Soong has been able to live well and to finance two costly presidential campaigns and a costly campaign for Taipei Mayor. Further Soong wanted to recently host a lavish banquet for People’s Republic of China (PRC) visitor Chen Yunlin. Where does the man get all his money? The dogs of bias don’t even sniff at that, but the answer is the system. For a person with the right past connections and patronage, running for and holding office in Taiwan can be a means to easily get and money-launder alleged gains and gifts. Some even speculate that the only reason Soong recently ran for Taipei Mayor (a race in which he only got 4 per cent of the vote) was not to win, but to money-launder his remaining People’s First Party (PFP) campaign and other system funds.

Where were the dogs of bias through all this? Soong had been implicated in the Chungsing Bills Finance Company scandal (that money was never regained) and he was also found guilty of using campaign funds as his personal assets but he never spent a day in jail. His assets were never frozen and his family and friends were not harassed by press or prosecutors. In the end, all he had to do was pay a small “gift tax.” Privilege, prejudice, pursuit of justice? You be the judge.

Then there is the recently convicted Diane Lee; as a Legislator and city councilor she was found guilty of illegally holding dual citizenship and profiting by some US$3 million dollars. Her sentence for US$3 million was commuted to two years. She claimed innocence because she believed the citizenship would have expired by her taking office, yet she condemned another officeholder of being guilty of the same crime with no benefit of doubt. She also willfully and repeatedly left blank the official form where she had to state whether she had dual citizenship. Why? If she really believed she was innocent, why not fill it in as not having dual citizenship? Lee is still free pending appeal. She has never spent a day in jail nor had her assets frozen, nor had her family and KMT defenders questioned as accomplices in crime. The dogs of bias never pursued the point that if she held office for 14 years, and a passport is only good for 10 years, somewhere, sometime, somehow in those 14 years she would have had to knowingly renew that passport with signature and photos. She also has profited in other ways by the special funds and perks of the system. A smart prosecutor might make a case for treason where a fraudulent person with the escape means of dual citizenship willfully makes laws for a country she is not committed to. Such a person is more easily open to moneyed influence and bribes from countries like the PRC. Yet the dogs of bias sleep and Lee still walks.

Then there is the well known case of Ma Ying-jeou where Ma’s secretary was found guilty of illegally putting some US$.5 million dollars into Ma’s bank account. He took the fall and spent 9 months in jail, but Ma walked. Ma never spent a day in jail even when indicted. Others were not questioned. The dogs of bias sniffed, but had an easy rabbit and let it go at that.

When a KMT person has been found guilty of corruption such as former Chang-hua County council speaker Pai Hung-shen and sentenced to eight years in prison, he never did time during his indictment or trial. When convicted he first was allowed to go to Taichung Veterans General Hospital for heart surgery. Then, surprise of surprises, Pai a man well into his 60s and recovering from heart surgery was able to give his police guard the slip and was last seen relaxing in a villa in Xiamen, China. The dogs of bias never gave a whimper, Pai’s assets were never frozen, his relatives never questioned. Even the Minister of Justice seemed unconcerned.

In Chen’s case, he has been imprisoned since the time of his indictment and not allowed to properly prepare a defense. His every conversation with his lawyers has been for a long time illegally monitored. He still does jail time despite his appeal. The issue is not that large funds were moved, Chen admits to it. The issue is the vague laws of campaign gifts and discretionary funds and the biased pursuit of some and not others.

Is Chen guilty? Let the courts decide, but let it be a fair trial with a fair chance at defense and a fair investigation. Anyone and everyone associated with Chen has been indicted and called in as the prosecutors fish for evidence. Like rabid dogs the prosecutors further bully, badger and detain all; their evidence is circumstantial but they hope to pressure someone to give them a shred of evidence. What they should be attacking is a system where so many KMT have profited in the past. Instead, they seek to prove that the campaign funds that so many others have profited by in the past, were bribes for Chen but “gifts or gains” of the system for others. The most extreme and absurd example has been their indicting Chen’s housekeeper under the charge that her year end bonus was the result of illegal campaign funds. Can anyone fathom the absurdity of a situation where any employee receiving his/her year end bonus, is obliged to know or ask where that bonus money came from and whether it was illegal or not?

In Freedom House’s assessment of Taiwan’s status of a free country, it advanced from grade 2 to grade 1 because of an increased crackdown on corruption; however it lost ground going from grade 1 to grade 2 in the loss of civil rights citing the example of the handling of Chen Shui-bian’s case as paramount. Su Jun-pin, the Minister of the Government Information Office (GIO) has tried to twist this to say it is an “affirmation of our progress.” In reality it is a stagnant holding of the status quo with a definite more feared loss of civil liberties; all the Ma government has done is to rob Peter to pay Paul but the GIO calls it progress.

Finally there is the matter of unprofessional and perhaps unethical skits. Chen’s prosecutors in a year end party with the judiciary mocked the former president’s imprisonment in a skit. With such rich past experiences, why did the dogs of bias only perform a skit on Chen and never on others? Look at the rich material. There could be a skit where Ma Ying-jeou self-righteously proclaims, “It was not I who put that filthy money in my personal bank account, it was my dastardly secretary.” Or a skit with Diane Lee weeping crocodile tears saying, “Please don’t take away the illegal US$3 million I gained. I worked hard for that illegal money.” Or a skit with a prosecutor giving James Soong a slap on the wrist and saying, “Sorry we had to do that Mr. Soong. By the way, I have a nephew looking for a job; do you think you could help?” And last but not least a version of the Keystone Kops where the MOJ and police allow the elderly Pai Hung-shen to give them the slip.

The only skit that the alleged dogs of bias performed was that on Chen. What is worse, the Minister of Justice ignoring professional ethics tried to pass it off. Like a situation where someone’s large dogs with muddy paws have just jumped all over you and knocked you down and the owner says, “It’s just playful fun, aren’t they cute puppies.” Is justice eroding? Is Taiwan under Ma Ying-jeou reverting to the privileged one-party state days of the KMT? Is the name “dogs of bias” well-deserved? You be the judge.


Other writings can be found at http://zen.sandiego.edu:8080/Jerome
回頂端
檢視會員個人資料 發送私人訊息
sunshine
版面管理員


註冊時間: 2007-09-22
文章: 1909

發表發表於: 星期四 二月 11, 2010 4:22 am    文章主題: 引言回覆

The hypocrisy and pretense fostered by the government of Taiwan’s President Ma Ying-jeou is once again demonstrated by Ma’s former law professor as he observes how Ma’s Minister of Justice attempts to make Taiwan emulate China. An edited version of this text appeared in English in the South China Morning Post (Hong Kong) on January 20, 2010 under the title “Under Threat,” and appeared in Chinese on January 21, in the China Times (Taiwan) (繁体中文)(简体中文). by Jerome A. Cohen and Yu-Jie Chen. It is important to read this to understand the continuous and disparate double standard that Ma’s people place Taiwan under. Wake up Taiwan!

The Chinese government’s continuing attacks on human rights lawyers rarely make foreign headlines these days. Monitoring, intimidating, disbarring and prosecuting activist lawyers have become routine in China. Even the tragic “disappearance” while in police custody of defense lawyer/political reformer Gao Zhisheng–now feared to be dead–hardly attracts attention.
It is also unremarkable for even non-political Chinese defense lawyers to suffer sanctions. The recent conviction of Beijing lawyer Li Zhuang for allegedly counseling his client to lie and bribe witnesses would not have been noted abroad if the case had not involved Chongqing’s extraordinary campaign to suppress organized crime.
By contrast, the Taiwan government’s new interest in curbing vigorous defense lawyers does constitute “news”. Although Taiwan’s president Ma Ying-Jeou recently took the occasion of the island’s Law Day to call for greater government efforts to promote judicial reform and human rights, his Ministry of Justice (MOJ) has been moving in the opposite direction.
Last year, the Ministry, concerned about the conduct of ex-president Chen Shui-Bian’s defense lawyers in its ongoing corruption prosecutions against him, failed in its efforts to impose disciplinary sanctions against one of Chen’s lawyers for supposed ethical violations. Now it is trying to introduce legislation to punish “obstructions of justice” that will inevitably restrict defense lawyers’ activities.
The MOJ has proposed to amend the criminal code in several ways that threaten the modified adversarial legal system that Taiwan adopted a decade ago. Instead of supporting the equal contest between prosecutors and defense lawyers on which that system is based, the MOJ proposals, reflecting traditional Chinese distrust of defense lawyers, would subject Taiwan’s lawyers to some of the same dangers confronted by their counterparts in China, including significant prison time.
One amendment would punish anyone, including lawyers, for abetting defendants or others to “fabricate, alter, destroy or conceal” important evidence in criminal cases, even when their advice has been ignored and caused no harm! Further, it would punish anyone for abetting defendants to make false statements concerning important facts in trial or investigation. Thus, if a court rejects the defendant’s claim that his pre-trial confession was coerced by police, his lawyers might be prosecuted for having urged him to repudiate the confession. This “Sword of Damocles” hangs over Mainland lawyers, sometimes intimidating them from giving such advice, despite the prevalence of! p! re-trial torture.
Equally troublesome is the proposal to punish “illegitimate use” of important evidence outside of court. But what use is “illegitimate” and what evidence is “important”? The MOJ has stated that the provision is meant, among other things, to prevent documents from public trials being revealed at press conferences. Yet this would prevent freedom of speech and information essential to monitoring of the judicial process by the media and the people. Such restrictions, to the extent they exist in other democratic societies, are generally justified by the need to protect jury deliberations against media pressures, but ! Taiwan has no juries.
Even more problematic is the proposal to punish lawyers not only for contempt of court but also for contempt of prosecutors! Legal systems require effective and fair procedures for punishing refusal to heed reasonable court orders. But, in a system where lawyers and prosecutors are supposed to be equal competitors in their efforts to persuade a neutral judge, it is ludicrous to punish lawyers for failing to obey prosecutors.
MOJ officials do not seem to realize that, under Taiwan’s new adversarial system, for most purposes prosecutors can no longer be regarded as members of the “judiciary”. Their status and functions are very different from those of judges.
The proposals–not yet submitted to the legislature–have understandably aroused strong opposition from the legal profession. Although the MOJ has stressed that the proposals are not targeted at lawyers, they will have an adverse impact upon lawyers’ defense work. If they are enacted, Taiwan is sure to be further downgraded in the civil liberties ratings of major non-governmental organizations such as Freedom House, a strong American supporter that last week criticized recent setbacks in the island’s protection of criminal defendants’ rights.
It is far from clear that additional restrictions on defense lawyers are needed to guard against “obstructions of justice” in Taiwan. The MOJ has cited no empirical studies to show that existing laws and ethical rules are inadequate. Moreover, the vague language of each proposed criminal prohibition is an invitation to abuse and confusion that would inhibit the robust defense lawyering that a fair justice system requires.
Every country needs effective administration of justice. Yet, every country also needs vigorous lawyers to check abuses of the criminal process. If these MOJ proposals are enacted, the plight of Taiwan’s defense lawyers may begin to resemble that of their Chinese counterparts.
http://www.usasialaw.org/?p=2630
回頂端
檢視會員個人資料 發送私人訊息
sunshine
版面管理員


註冊時間: 2007-09-22
文章: 1909

發表發表於: 星期六 二月 20, 2010 1:01 am    文章主題: 引言回覆

英九重建國民黨過去的骯髒歷史

(Jerome F. Keating Ph.D.) 譯者 / 洪萱芳

中國國民黨過去是一個極其熟練於用其龐大財力來收買忠誠隨從的政黨。有誰能夠忘記它在台灣強行實施一黨專政近四十年所造成的不公不義呢?又有誰能夠忘記國民黨如何一面宣揚贊成民主化的立場,卻又向其黨員保證,他們可在立法院享有圖利終生的職位呢?國民黨中國內戰失敗,於 1949 年逃難到台灣。在 1947 年當選立法委員的國民黨黨員,一直到 1992 年,李登輝終於決定清理門戶之前,未曾面對過另一次選舉。當時大多數的立委不是已經逝世,就是已經準備拿著優渥的養老金退休。過去的歷史,過去了嗎?絕對不會過去。


在 2010 年 1 月 19 日星期二,國民黨一黨獨大的立法院,在七十分鐘內,迫使三十位委員投票,強制通過一個極具爭議性的地制法修正案,將適用於明年年底的五都首長選舉。這修正案規定,2005 年當選的現任鄉鎮長,將可轉任為區長,任期到 2014 年。這些職位在正當情況下,應由 2010 年 12 月當選之特別都會新任市長指派。

而實際狀況卻是,不管誰當選特別都會的市長 (國民黨或民進黨),這五十六位區長將會將其職位歸功於國民黨多數掌控的立法院,而非由人民選出的新任市長。以前,新市長並無權力任命他們可信任的人當區長。

這是國民黨用來操弄人民願望的新手法。他們最近才打輸幾場選戰,愈來愈擔心。幾位貪污的國民黨立委已經失去他們的席次,出乎他們意料之外,在補選時,人民改選民進黨立委取代了他們的席次。

而台灣的國民黨籍總統馬英九一如往昔,當其他人依照他的意志行事的時候,他就坐在場邊點頭贊同。就這樣,在 12 月這場重要的選舉中,不管結果如何,在原本的主要縣市,將有五十六個現任的鄉鎮長,到時會報答馬英九讓他們不經選舉改任區長的恩賜。這些人現在已經知道他們的職位,不用競選就可保留到 2014 年。如果他們願意的話,他們甚至可以天天坐在辦公室,喝茶拿薪水。在民主制度下,台灣人民真的拿他們沒辦法。

然而,當台灣人民對立法院這個粗糙惡劣的表現無法反制的時候,他們仍可以透過民主制度所賦給他們的權利,有所做為。他們可以透過二月份的立委補選,讓所有國民黨的候選人全部落選,也讓國民黨候選人輸掉 12 月年底特別都會市長的選舉。這至少可以開始改正過去的制度濫用,也開始建立一個公平競爭的民主賽場。

(譯者為北卡大學綠堡分校特殊教育博士班學生,原文刊在 http://zen.sandiego.edu:8080/Jerome
回頂端
檢視會員個人資料 發送私人訊息
從之前的文章開始顯示:   
發表新主題   回覆主題    《南方快報》南方論壇 首頁 -> Formosa Connection 所有的時間均為 台灣時間 (GMT + 8 小時)
前往頁面 上一頁  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  下一頁
5頁(共8頁)

 
前往:  
無法 在這個版面發表文章
無法 在這個版面回覆文章
無法 在這個版面編輯文章
無法 在這個版面刪除文章
無法 在這個版面進行投票


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
正體中文語系由 phpbb-tw 維護製作