The Democratic Progressive Party: Grow Up!

The Democratic Progressive Party: Grow Up!
A Translation
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
November 18, 2008

In order to prevent himself from being prosecuted, former President Chen Shui-bian has staged a hunger strike. His ploy has sparked considerable sympathy, solidarity, and even indignation. But democracy and the rule of law on Taiwan are hard-won prizes. Both the ruling and opposition parties ought to exercise self-restraint. One should not surrender to emotionalism and refuse to distinguish between right and wrong. One should not file frivolous suits against law enforcement officers merely doing their duty. To do so is irresponsible behavior, and detrimental to the nation's future.

When Chen Shui-bian held high his handcuffed hands, many in the Green Camp felt pain. DPP Chairman Tsai Ing-wen said she considered it a gross humiliation. Even non-Green Camp individuals, seeing Chen Shui-bian's feeble condition several days into his hunger strike, will find it hard not to feel pity. But this is irrelevant. Behind Chen Shui-bian's pathetic image is a former president and his family up to their necks in major corruption scandals. The uncovering of these scandals has subjected the Chen family to legal prosecution. The prosecutorial system is the last line of defense in the justice system. People count on it to protect themselves and to regulate those in power. Otherwise, absolute power will corrupt, absolutely.

Once criminal investigators and public prosecutors begin their investigation, members of the First Family must be treated the same as other citizens. They must be subject to the same legal constraints. They must answer for their crimes. They must be punished according to the law. Offering a former head of state a few minor courtesies may improve public perception. But Chen Shui-bian will inevitably resort to all sorts of means to cast himself as a long-suffering martyr. One may provide a former head of state under investigation for corruption a few minor courtesies. But once Chen Shui-bian steps down, he has lost his immunity. Whether to extend him such minor courtesies as not using handcuffs, or not detaining him, are of secondary importance. What Chen Shui-bian really wants to evade is the essence of justice.

Compassion is universal. But the deeds committed by a powerful president during his term of office must be subject to the law. Scandals that have emerged must be investigated one by one. Members of the public may idolize him or despise him. If he experiences health problems, he must be given medical care. But his legal rights and responsibilities will remain exactly the same. Is he guilty of corruption? Only the evidence will tell. Only a judge can decide. This is a legal issue, not a popularity contest. This is a factual issue, not an emotional issue. The First Family's involvement in scandals is about right and wrong. Even elementary school children know they may not take money that does not belongs to them. Shouting louder does not make one right. Making oneself into an object of pity does not make one innocent of a crime. One may not take money that does not belong to you, stage a hunger strike, damage one's health, then get off scot-free. Conversetly, if the justice system proves that the Chen family is not guilty of corruption, a hunger strike is irrelevant. Chen Shui-bian will be found not guilty.

Without the rule of law, there can be no democracy. Because the people will lack the means to detect and remove a malignant tumor. It has taken 20 years to establish democracy on Taiwan. Our system of justice was once defective and subject to wide criticism. But a new generation has embraced new ideals. The public expects those charged with administering justice to show more spine. With the public's support, an independent judiciary, unintimidated by those in high office, may be able to establish some credibility with the public. If so, it can provide order amidst chaos, and act as an impartial arbiter. This will establish a foundation for the future of the nation, and become an asset to Taiwan.

Investigators and prosecutors have been busy investigating Green Camp officials. Some have expressed concerns about selective prosecution. Holding suspects without charging them is improper. These merit further discussion. The ROC is still learning the meaning of judicial independence. The administration of justice must be improved. Relevant legal provisions need to be amended one by one. This includes outdated legal procedures. Martial law was lifted on Taiwan 20 years ago. Two changes in the ruling party have taken place. Does the DPP intend to scream "judicial persecution," the way it did 20 or 30 years ago? Does it intend to allow DPP officials to incite violence, and claim that the 228 Incident is happening all over again? Does it intend to claim that "Taiwanese are being bullied?" and complain to the United States? The DPP is making people wonder. Have they traveled "Back to the Future?" Twenty years later, the DPP is still lodging the same complaints. Has Taiwan endured the past 20 years for nothing?

Is it Taiwan that has endured the past 20 years for nothing? Or is it the Democratic Progressive Party? Is Chen Shui-bian's prosecution "humiliating Taiwan?" Or are the DPP's antics humiliating itself?

Problems with the administration of justice should be resolved through judicial channels. Prosecutorial abuse of power may be discussed, If necessary, the laws can be amended to ensure due process. Those dissatisfied with rulings may appeal until the judicial system restores their reputations. If one demonstrates only a selective respect for justice, if one screams "political persecution" each time the court fails to find in one's favor, if one postures as a tragic martyr and incites mobs to take to the streets, then one undermines the hard-won credibility of the justice system, and demonstrates one's lack of respect for the justice system.

The real problem for the Democratic Progressive Party is not any difficulty distancing itself from Ah-Bian, or being hijacked by Deep Green extremists. The real problem is that the public on Taiwan has been patiently waiting for the Democratic Progressive Party to show that it has a conscience, and cares about right and wrong. The Democratic Progressive Party values ethnically-rooted nation-building more highly than it values right and wrong. The Democratic Progressive doesn't care whether the nation regresses and society is polarized. If such a political party were ever to succeed in founding a nation, how would it tell its president elect not to engage in corruption?

中時電子報
中國時報 　2008.11.18
民進黨，長大吧！
中時社論

為了對抗司法，前總統陳水扁不惜訴諸絕食，引發不少同情甚至激憤的聲援，但在台灣的民主法治好不容易走到今天時，無論朝野，都應該自我約束，一味訴諸情緒而不辨是非大義，甚至控訴迫害侮辱司法，都是對台灣的未來不負責任。

的 確，當陳水扁高舉上了手銬的雙手時，很多綠營群眾感到心在淌血，民進黨主席蔡英文也認為是一大羞辱。看到陳水扁絕食多日後的憔悴形影，即使是非綠營民眾， 對此幕難免也有不忍之感。但是，重點其實不在這裡，在陳水扁看來可憐的形象背後，是這位前總統及家人涉及的多起重大貪汙弊案，因為爆發弊案，他們才會開始 接受司法的必要處理程序。司法是正義良知的最後一道防線，人民靠它來保護自己並規範執政者，否則沒有約束的權力必然腐化。

從檢調展開偵辦 動作起，第一家庭就和所有國民一樣，必須接受法律的約束，為自己的行為承擔法律後果，也必須接受司法的裁判。當然，如果對前國家元首多些尊重，外界觀感也 許會好一點。但無論如何，恐怕陳水扁終究會以不同方式塑造自己受苦受難的悲壯形象。畢竟再怎麼給予形式上的禮遇，針對貪瀆犯行的偵辦與審判，陳水扁卸任之 後，就沒有豁免特權了，而形式的上銬或羈押還是次要，陳水扁真正想要規避的是實質的司法。

惻隱之心人皆有之，但一位曾經權傾一時的前總 統，在任期內的所作所為，當然必須接受法律的檢驗，爆出的弊案，也必須一一釐清。民眾可以崇拜他，也可以憎恨他，健康若有問題 必須給予醫療，但他在法律上的權利義務不會因此打任何折扣。更明白講，到底有沒有貪汙，只有證據能說話，只有法官能裁判。這是法律問題，不是人氣問題；是 事實問題，不是同情問題。第一家庭弊案涉及的是最基本的是非，是連小學生都知道的「不可以拿不該拿的錢」，不是聲音大就有理，也不是愈可憐就愈無辜。沒有 說拿錢在先，絕食自傷在後，就可以因此把犯行無罪化。同樣的，如果司法確認扁家未犯貪瀆之罪，不需要絕食，陳水扁也可以得到應有的清白。

沒 有法治，就沒有健全的民主，因為人民將缺乏偵測及割除毒瘤的武器。台灣廿年來逐漸建立起民主政治，曾經深受詬病的司法檢調體系，隨著愈來愈多懷抱理想的新 生代投入，以及在人民對司法風骨的期許支持下，迅速展現出超然獨立與不畏強權的堅持，也逐漸建立起公信力，讓民眾在混亂紛擾中，還有一個可以信任的正義仲 裁。這是國家未來良性發展的重要基礎，也是台灣的一個珍貴資產。

但憑心而論，最近檢調密集偵辦綠營高官，確實令人有過度群體化的疑惑，未 審先押是否適當，也值得進一步討論。和民主一樣，台灣的司法仍在學習改進之中，其中的缺失需要逐一修正，包括若干過時的法規程序，但在此時此刻的台灣，在 解嚴廿多年、政黨輪替兩次的台灣，如果民進黨上下仍和二、三十年前一樣控訴司法迫害，或放任黨內人士的煽動激越言行，包括聲稱二二八事件重演，疾呼台灣人 被欺負，要去美國告狀。不但讓人有今夕何夕、時光倒流之感，還覺得，如果過了廿年，我們喊的還是一樣的控訴，那台灣這廿年不是都白過了？

真的是如此嗎？還是民進黨這廿年白過了？這究竟是在侮辱台灣、還是在羞辱自己？

司 法問題，應該循司法管道解決。檢調是否濫權可以討論，必要時可修法加強規範，不滿判決也可以上訴，直到司法管道還自己清白。但如果對司法只有選擇性的尊 重，一旦不利於己，就動輒高喊政治迫害，大演悲情悲壯博人熱淚甚至鼓勵群眾站出來，不但傷害司法好不容易建立的公信力，還顯現出對司法機制的毫無尊敬。

對 於扁案，民進黨真正的問題，不在態度尷尬或難以切割或被深綠綁住，而是台灣人民左看右看，耐心地等到現在，還看不見「良心」與「是非」在哪裡。如果民進黨 的價值位階中，族群建國高於道德是非，即使國家退化社會對立也無所謂，這樣的政黨，即使真的建國了，請問要怎樣告訴新國家的總統，你不可以貪汙？