Uncover the Truth behind the TaiMed Corruption Scandal

Uncover the Truth behind the TaiMed Corruption Scandal
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
February 8, 2012

Summary: During the election, the TaiMed corruption scandal underwent a number of dramatic ups and downs. The full picture remains murky. But the case concerns cabinet discipline and possible official misconduct. Therefore it must be pursued until the truth is uncovered. The public must be given a proper accounting.

Full Text below:

During the election, the TaiMed corruption scandal underwent a number of dramatic ups and downs. The full picture remains murky. But the case concerns cabinet discipline and possible official misconduct. Therefore it must be pursued until the truth is uncovered. The public must be given a proper accounting.

The scandal be divided into two parts. One. The Special Investigation Unit began investigating the TaiMed corruption scandal during the presidential campaign. The Special Investigation Unit opened the case and began gathering evidence. This was the correct approach. Had it failed to do so, had it delayed until after the election, it would surely be accused of "waiting to settle accounts." But since it already began its investigation, it merely underscores the need to offer the public a proper accounting.

Investigators may conclude that Tsai Ing-wen, Ho Mei-yueh, and others were not guilty of illegal conduct. But the investigation report must explain why the cabinet engaged in such questionable conduct. Therefore, even if the Special Investigation Unit eventually announces that it has chosen not to indict, it is nevertheless duty bound to investigate.

Two. The scandal involves both the Su Tseng-chang cabinet and the Chang Chun-hsiung cabinet. The cabinet members under suspicion should voluntarily come forward and offer frank accounts of their actions to the Special Investigation Unit. Tsai Ing-wen and Ho Mei-yueh insist they did nothing illegal. They insist that the scandal is not even a scandal. Since that is their story, they should offer the public a proper accounting, in accordance with the relevant legal statutes and administrative procedures. After all, this is hardly a routine matter. The public has a right to know. How can a corruption scandal as unthinkable as TaiMed possibly be passed off as "legal?" If more incidents like this occur in the future. will they too be passed off as "legal?"

We should harbor no preconceptions about whether the TaiMed corruption scandal is illegal. This was the consensus during the presidential campaign. That said, it is nevertheless a major scandal. It reveals that the cabinet was engaged in highly questionable conduct. Therefore the Special Investigation Unit must conduct a fair and impartial investigation. The parties under suspicion, including Tsai Ing-wen and Ho Mei-yueh, must come clean. They must present a full picture of the TaiMed corruption scandal. They should use the occasion to clarify the line between cabinet operations and the nation's laws. If they refuse, then the conduct of the cabinet will remain nothing more than black ops.

The TaiMed corruption scandal remains shrouded in mystery. For example, why did TaiMed win out against Nanhua? Was the contract in fact awarded by a secret three man coterie? The company name "TaiMed" appeared for the first time during the second secret contract meeting. The budget for the project was substantially increased. Yet it was never submitted to Premier Su Tseng-chang for approval. Was this actually in compliance with cabinet regulations? Tsai Ing-wen approved the TaiMed case herself. Soon after, she was made chairman of the TaiMed Company. Was the Tsai Ing-wen who approved TaiMed, the same legal entity who assumed the chairmanship of TaiMed? If she was not, then why was the project funded by the cabinet? If she was, then can Vice Premier Tsai explain why she disbursed government funds to TaiMed Chairman Tsai? Tsai later established the TaiMed biotech venture capital firm. She proposed that TaiMed establish a TaiMed biotechnology venture capital investment and management company. She arranged for the National Development Fund to invest billions, in advance, and to her company a 10 year, 1.32 billion dollar management fee, also in advance. Were Premier Su Tseng-chang and Premier Chang Chun-hsiung really unaware of the connection between the TaiMed biotechnology venture capital firm and TaiMed? Every one of these points is highly suspicious. The behavior of the suspects, including Tsai Ing-wen, Ho Mei-yueh, and David Ho, is equally suspicious. This is hardly an "attack upon the biotech industry." Concern for cabinet regulations hardly qualifies as an attack on the biotech industry.

Suspects in the TaiMed corruption scandal must clear up these questions. A nation's cabinet must not be permitted to evade prosecution merely by muddying the waters. The relevant legal norms are one thing. It is possible that everything was "legal." But the conduct of the cabinet is another matter altogether. No one believes such behavior can be tolerated by a nation's cabinet. Therefore the Special Investigation Unit, Tsai Ing-wen, Ho Mei-yueh, and other parties, must clear the air. Otherwise, the cabinet will be nothing more than a black ops organization.

We hope the Special Investigation Unit will take responsibility. It must provide the public with a truthful picture of its investigation results. Even if it chooses not to indict, it must make public its legal reasoning, and allow the public to evaluate what it did. 

We hope Tsai Ing-wen will change her attitude. She refused to take responsibility for her conduct during the presidential campaign. She refused to voluntarily explain her conduct to the people. She should seize the initiative, preferably before being formally summoned by the Special Investigation Unit. She should avoid making allegations that the investigation is being conducted in secrecy, or that she is being "legally persecuted." Tsai Ing-wen appears ready to make another bid for the presidency in 2016. She should avoid repeating the history of the Chen corruption case. She should avoid burdening the general election with endless wrangling over judicial proceedings.

宇昌案應當水落石出
【聯合報╱社論】 2012.02.08

大選期間，宇昌案鬧得風風雨雨，但迄仍真相未明；然而，這畢竟是一個攸關內閣紀律及政務官操行的重大事件，仍應使之水落石出，對國人作出一個交代。

可分兩方面說。一方面，特偵組在選舉期間已著手偵辦宇昌案。在現今這個時點回頭來看，特偵組在當時就立案偵辦，查扣證物，應屬正確；倘非如此，若是延至選後發動，必貽「秋後算帳」的譏評；而如今既已啟動偵辦，即必須對國人交出一個清楚的結案報告。

當然，偵辦的結果，可能證實蔡英文、何美玥等未涉不法；但偵查報告亦須向國人說明，為何在內閣中會發生如此離奇之事。因而，即使最後特偵組公布的是一本「不起訴書」，這也是特偵組對國人應負的責任。

另一方面，此案跨越蘇貞昌內閣及張俊雄內閣；相關閣員及事務官今後在配合特偵組偵辦時，應主動坦率交代因果始末。尤其是蔡英文及何美玥二人，既自認未違法，也不是「弊案」，則亦應就相關的法律依據及行政程序向國人明白交代。因為，這絕對不是一個平常事件，國人有權利知道，像宇昌案這樣的奇事，如何可以「合法」地發生？尤其，今後若再發生此類事件，是否仍屬「合法」？

我們認為，現在不必對宇昌案是否違法的問題持有定見，這點在選舉期間即是輿論主流；但畢竟這是一個暴露出內閣操作出現重大疑義的事件，仍應在特偵組的公正偵辦，及當事者如蔡英文、何美玥的坦誠說明下，向社會呈現出宇昌案的真相與全貌。亦即，無論如何，皆應藉此案來釐清內閣操作在國家法律與閣員操守上的界際為何？倘非如此，內閣豈不成了一只大黑箱？

宇昌案疑竇重重。例如：為何宇昌案勝過南華案？是否在程序上真的只是經過「三人密簽」就成案？第二次密簽，首次出現TaiMed公司的名字，並大幅改變計畫成本，卻未呈蘇貞昌院長，這是否符合內閣規制？蔡英文自己批定TaiMed案，後來又出任所有以TaiMed為英文商號的公司之董事長；而那個「蔡英文批定」的TaiMed，與她後來「出任董事長」的TaiMed，在內閣的法律認定上是否為同一主體？若不是，為何由內閣撥款？若是，則蔡如何解釋「蔡副院長批給蔡董事長」？再者，蔡後來又自設台懋生技創投公司，並主張由台懋生技創投「投資並管理」宇昌公司，以此向國發基金請撥投資十億，並預付十年十三‧二億的管理費；此一「台懋生技創投公司」與宇昌公司的「聯結」，蘇內閣或張內閣知不知情？以上種種重大情節，無一不是疑竇叢生；而涉入的當事者，如蔡英文、何美玥、何大一所作所為，也無一不是疑點重重。這絕不是要「打擊」生技，而是內閣規制絕不能糊裡糊塗。

宇昌案必須解答這一切疑問，因為，國家內閣中絕不可容許有如此不清不白的事件。此事的法律規範界際是一回事，因為可能一切皆「合法」；但此事的閣員操守界際卻是另一回事，因為無人認為國家內閣中可以容許這類事件。故而，無論是特偵組的偵辦，及蔡英文、何美玥等當事者的說明，皆應為社會釐清事實，否則內閣即成了黑箱。

我們寄望特偵組能負起責任，務必要向國人作出一個呈現真相全貌的偵結報告，即使是一本「不起訴書」，也應讓國人一睹。

我們更希望蔡英文能改變在選季中不願面對此案的態度，主動向國人說明原委；且最好能在特偵組正式傳訊前即掌握主動，以免因涉偵察不公開而錯失時機，或又導入「司法追殺」的老梗。何況，依目前情勢看，蔡英文仍有投入二○一六年大選的可能性，切勿再演成如扁案一般將大選角力與司法程序糾纏不清的情勢。