Uphold Neutrality and the Rule of Law

Uphold Neutrality and the Rule of Law
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
January 22, 2008

Chang Cheng-hsiung and his ilk must vacate the political arena. They must vanish without a trace. The Central Election Commission (CEC) was meant to be a professional and neutral institution. But Chang Cheng-hsiung and others like him have turned it into the Democratic Progressive Party's political tool. Chang Cheng-hsiung and his ilk are a disgrace to democracy, a detriment to constitutional rule.

The results of the legislative elections is likely to be a second regime change. To the nation's civil servants, this is an unforgettable experience. No party rules in perpetuity. But civil servants serve for a lifetime. Ruling parties come and go. It is civil servants who are the gatekeepers of constitutional values and the maintainers of government standards. If a ruling party tramples over the constitution, violates the law, misrules the nation, and undermines society's morals, civil servants must be able to maintain order until regime change brings another party into power.

Chang Cheng-hsiung is not an ordinary civil servant. The CEC chairmanship is a constitutionally-mandate, specially-appointed, politically-neutral role. The Democratic Progressive Party applied Superglue to the locks on the doors to the Legislative Yuan. They prevented Chang Cheng-hsiung's firing. Chang Cheng-hsiung then used the CEC as a tool in the DPP's political struggles. He manipulated elections and violated neutrality. But even Chang Cheng-hsiung was unable to revive the Democratic Progressive Party. Not this time. Instead, his attempt to deliberately sow confusion by package-dealing the plebiscite with the election infuriated the electorate, who used their ballots to punish the DPP. In the end, Chang Cheng-hsiung destroyed himself. He destroyed the CEC. He destroyed the spirit of the constitution. He even destroyed the DPP.

The CEC is neutral in theory. It ought to be neutral in fact. The ruling Democratic Progressive Party's has committed many sins during its eight years of misrule. But its most unforgiveable sin is that it has virtually destroyed all remnants of neutrality required under constitutionalism and the rule of law.

Can you imagine Nita Ying as the Minister of Audit, nominating members of the Bureau of Audit? Have you seen the list of rejected Control Yuan nominees? Is any political trust possible under such circumstances? Can you believe that Grand Justice Cheng Chung-mo strongarmed legislators on behalf of the ruling regime's constitutional interpretation case? Have you seen the way the grand justices twisted the meaning of the constitution on behalf of the ruling regime during its constitutional interpretation cases? How could our Attorney General let us down so badly? How could our Special Investigative Unit be so flagrantly partisan? How could our state-owned enterprises become political spoils? How could our banks become underwriters of our ruling regime?

Grand justices, CEC officials, state-owned enterprises, and special investigative unit officials all require neutrality and professionalism to a greater or lesser degree. The black hand of political manipulators and partisan interests must be excluded. But every one of these these realms has been coopted. The nominally public Council of Grand Justices has become a private service provider for partisan interests. The nominally public CEC has become a private service provider for the ruling DPP. Neutrality has disappeared and constitutional rule is nowhere to be found.

Neutrality and professionalism are indispensable to constitutionalism and the rule of law. One must fight for them tooth and nail. Compromise is not an option. If the CEC is not neutral, then constitutional rule has been seriously undermined. When the CEC produced Chang Cheng-hsiung, the CEC became a DPP pawn, instead of a fair and impartial entity. The DPP's special aptitude is its ability to plant counterparts of Chang Cheng-hsiung everywhere, from the Council of Grand Justices to the China Steel Corporation. No need to enumerate. The public can count.

Lin Wen-hu, the Vice-chairman of the National Parents Union, concluded that Minister of Education Tu Cheng-shen's "political machinations were not good. He (Tu) is working for the DPP, not for education." This remark rang true with many parents. In fact, it hit the nail on the head. Parents are concerned that professionalism and the spirit of education have been lost. By the same token, many peoples' concern is that Chang Cheng-hsiung is working for the DPP, not for fair elections.

A second "regime change" is imminent. Major reconstruction is required to restore constitutionalism and the rule of law, along with neutrality and professionalism. Grand justices like Cheng Chung-mo, CEC Commissioners like Chang Cheng-hsiung, and Ministers of Education like Tu Cheng-shen are out of the question. Such individuals must not be nominated. Individuals nominated must display neutrality and professionalism, and not willingly debase themselves.

Parents' representatives lament that Tu Cheng-sheng is "working for the Democratic Progressive Party, not for education." Every civil servant today needs to hear this lament. If indeed a "second regime change" is imminent, every civil servant needs to hear it again: "The Civil Service does not belong to the KMT. It belongs to the people. It serves the people."

憲政法治的中立領域不容斷送
【聯合報╱社論】
2008.01.22 03:16 am

務使「張政雄」之輩在政壇絕跡。中選會是一個「專業中立」及「特任中立」的機構，卻被張政雄等操弄成民進黨的政爭工具。張政雄等是民主的恥辱，憲政的災難。

這次立委選舉的結果顯示，「二次政黨輪替」不無可能。這對全國公務員，皆應是一個刻骨銘心的經歷。沒有永遠的執政黨，卻有終生任職的公務員。執政黨可以如走馬燈，公務員才是憲政價值與政府品質的守門人。如果換來一個毀憲亂法、失政敗德的執政黨，公務員就要挺得住，一直挺到政黨輪替為止。

張政雄不是一般的公務員，中選會主委是「特任中立」的憲政角色。民進黨用「三秒膠」鎖住了立法院，保住了張政雄；張政雄竟將中選會當作民進黨的政爭工具，玩弄選舉，盡失中立原則。然而，張政雄這次卻未救活民進黨，反而因「公投亂大選」，使國人義憤難遏，用選票唾棄了民進黨。最後，張政雄毀了自己，毀了中選會，毀了憲政精神，其實也毀了民進黨。

眾人皆知「行政中立」，中選會更應「絕對中立」。而民進黨執政八年來，最重大的罪孽，即在幾乎摧毀了一切在憲政法治上應當固守的「中立」地帶。

你能想像用殷琪做監察委員的提名審核人嗎？你看到上一波被否決的監委名單能夠產生政治信任嗎？你相信大法官如城仲模居然為釋憲案替主政者關說立委嗎？你難道看不出大法官釋憲案中那種曲筆護主的姿態嗎？我們的檢察總長何以如此令人失望？我們的特偵組何以如此惹人議論？我們的公營事業怎麼變成分贓的籌碼？甚至我們的銀行何以竟成了主政者的政治金主？

從大法官、中選會到公營事業、特偵組，其中皆有程度不一的中立地帶，及專業領域；不容政治黑手操弄，不容黨派利益入侵。但是，縱目四望，竟是無一倖免。大法官會議若成了黨派入侵的「公營事業」，中選會若成了黑手介入的「公私行庫」，中立既失，憲政民主也就不堪聞問了。

這些中立地帶及專業領域，是維持憲政法治之所需。寸土必爭，無可妥協。中選會不中立，憲政就受重傷；中選會出了一個張政雄，中選會就成了民進黨的政治籌碼，而非中立公正的憲政機關。民進黨的本事，就是從大法官會議到中鋼公司，都布置了「張政雄」這樣的角色。此處毋庸列舉，國人扳著手指算算即可。

全國家長聯盟副理事長林文虎，談到他對教育部長杜正勝的觀感，他說：「政治操弄不太好；他（杜正勝）是為民進黨工作，不是為教育！」這句話引發了極多家長的共鳴，誠是一針見血之論。家長們的憂慮是：教育的專業被摧毀了，教育的精神被汙染了。同理，豈不是也有許多國人深自怨嘆：張政雄是在為民進黨工作，不是為公正的選舉！

值此可能出現「二次政黨輪替」的時機，主要的「災後重建」工作之一，就是要回復憲政法治體制中一切的中立地帶與專業原則。大法官裡勿再有「城仲模」，中選會裡勿再有「張政雄」，教育部裡勿再有「杜正勝」。一方面，提名任命者不可拔擢這類人物；另一方面，接受任命者應當體現其職位上應具的中立專業角色，不可自甘墮落。

家長代表對杜正勝的評語：「他是為民進黨工作，不是為教育！」這句話可以說給今天的全體公務員聽；如果出現「二次政黨輪替」，亦應再說一次：「公務員不是為國民黨工作，要為國家、為人民！」