A Shot Aimed not just at Wang Jin-pyng

A Shot Aimed not just at Wang Jin-pyng
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, Republic of China)
A Translation
September 12, 2013

Summary: The political atmosphere is heating up. Yesterday the KMT Disciplinary Committee carried out Chairman Ma Ying-jeou's wishes by revoking Wang Jin-pyng's party membership. This will in turn revoke his status as a Legislator without Porfolio and his status as Speaker of the Legislature. The influence peddling scandal continues to simmer. Minister of Justice Tseng Yung-fu and Speaker of the Legislature Wang Jin-pying have been forced to step down, shaking public confidence. Under the circumstances, how can the DPP remain cavalier about Ker Chien-ming's role in the scandal?

Full text below:

The political atmosphere is heating up. Yesterday the KMT Disciplinary Committee carried out Chairman Ma Ying-jeou's wishes by revoking Wang Jin-pyng's party membership. This will in turn revoke his status as a Legislator without Porfolio and his status as Speaker of the Legislature. The influence peddling scandal continues to simmer. Minister of Justice Tseng Yung-fu and Speaker of the Legislature Wang Jin-pying have been forced to step down, shaking public confidence. Under the circumstances, how can the DPP remain cavalier about Ker Chien-ming's role in the scandal?

Ma Ying-jeou's decision may have been wise, or it may have been foolish. It may have been politically profitable, or it may have been politically disastrous. But the shot was fired, and not at Wang alone. It was a shot fired at the entire political establishment and its incorrigible habit of influence peddling. If the Legislative Yuan engages in obstructionism, it will pay a heavy price. If the Minister of Justice considers influence peddling acceptable and refuses to follow the law, he will be forced to resign. These examples should be considered a stern warning to all politicians.

From this day forward, every politician must consider the fate of Wang Jin-pyng. No politician may use his official position to influence executive or judicial branch personnel. Whether he resorts to inducements, threats, "guanxi," or payoffs makes no difference. Wang paid a heavy price. Whatever reputation he might have amassed over his lifetime has been lost. Conversely, any executive or judicial branch officials targeted by corrupt politicians or businessmen will have every reason to "just say no," and to inform their superiors. It is their duty to uphold their own integrity and imparitality.

Only such a perspective will enable the public to recognize when such a treacherous and unpredictable situation unfolds. The influence peddling scandal led to high-level personnel change. The opposition DPP stood by Wang Jin-pyngping. Some in the ruling KMT did as well. This has increased the resistance Ma Ying-jeou must overcome. The resistance has been further exacerbated by accusations of conspiracy, of public settling of private debts, and of police state abuse of power. All of these have made Ma Ying-jeou's Draconian decision the subject of endless debate.

Wang Jin-pyng's wide ranging connections offer the most obvious contrast. So many political insiders and outsiders are so eager to speak out on his behalf. This enables him to appear righteous even when he is guilty as charged. Meanwhile, Ma Ying-jeou and Huang Shi-ming high-minded sabre-rattling viewed as harsh and unreasonable. This is a political paradox. Right and wrong are frequently at odds with feelings. Excessive concern for feelings inevitably blurs right and wrong. Excessive emphasis on right and wrong inevitably ignores feelings. Ma Ying-jeou and Wang Jin-pyng represent two different archetypes.

A democracy must abide by the rule of law. Balancing right and wrong against feelings is dangerous. Feelings and "guanxi" depend upon "gray areas." They are fundamentally inconsistent with the rule of law. One might even say that the reason democracy on Taiwan cannot advance, is its overvaluing of "feelings" and its undervaluing of the rule of law. This makes it impossible to promote the rule of law. If people set aside political struggle and apply the rule of law to the Wang corruption scandal, they may actually learn somthing from the scandal.

Consider political reality. Ma and Wang may have grievances. But people are more concerned about political ideals than private vendettas. They hope to shatter the barriers ostructing political progress on Taiwan. Speaker of the Legislature Wang Jin-pyng is stepping down from his duties. Confrontation between the ruling and opposition parties will lead to dramatic changes in the balance of power. The political situation is sure to become increasingly precarious. But at least now the deadlock can be broken. Politics can be transformed. The key is where do the people want the country to go?

In all fairness, how Ma Ying-jeou dealt with Wang Jin-pyng is worth debating. First, revoking Wang's status as Speaker of the Legislature was an important matter. The process demands semantic precision. The procedures must be by the book. One cannot be too careful. Secondly, President Ma called the influence peddling case "the most shameful event in the history of democracy and the rule of law on Taiwan." That was a bit of an exaggeration. Compared to President Chen Shui-bian's corruption, this was small potatoes. Thirdly, the ruling KMT is overly secretive about the identity of KMT Disciplinary Committee members. Ma Ying-jeou called attention to the "specified punishments" beforehand. He personally attended the session and spoke out against Wang. From a procedural perspective, this may invite criticism.

In any event, President Ma's political support has never been so low. He decided to impose Draconian punishments on Wang Jin-pyng with little concern for political repercussions. He established a rule of law benchmark for influence peddling prosecution. He demonstrated his determination to battle influence peddling to the bitter end. His blow was personally risky but well delivered. This may be the most courageous battle on behalf of the rule of law and against corruption on Taiwan. Most importantly, he must face wave upon wave of counterattacks. He must remain calm. He must rally the support of the public.

這一槍，瞄準的不只是王金平個人
【聯合報╱社論】
2013.09.12 02:36 am

在滾燙的政治氛圍中，國民黨考紀會昨天貫徹了主席馬英九的意志，對王金平做出「撤銷黨籍」的處分，此舉不僅將使王金平失去不分區立委資格，也將因此失去擔任國會議長的資格。關說案發展至此，法務部長曾勇夫和立法院長王金平相繼下台，撼動社會人心；試問，民進黨對柯建銘仍要保持漠然以對嗎？

姑且不論馬英九這次堅持開鍘是聰明或是魯莽，或在政治上是得是失，這一槍開出，絕不能看成只是瞄準王金平個人而發，而是對準了整個政壇積重難返的關說惡習的當頭一擊。如果立法院長為人說項，便要付出如此慘痛的代價；如果法務部長接受關說卻未依規定登錄，便要丟掉烏紗帽；這樣的殷鑑，對所有政治人物都應該是莫大的警惕。

亦即，從今而後，任何政治人物試圖利用職位向行政人員或司法部門關說，即使沒有利誘、要脅、或取得對價關係，都不能不想想王金平今天的下場，那是賠掉了一生征戰沙場勳章的莫大代價。相對的，任何行政部門官員或司法體系人員未來在接獲政商人物的關說請託時，都有理由斷然拒絕，並依程序向上級進行通報，這是他們確保自己執行職務能正直無私的大道。

也唯有從這樣的角度著眼，民眾才知道要如何看待接下來詭譎莫測的政治風雲。不可否認，關說事件演成如此高層的政治變局，不僅在野黨選擇站在王金平的一方，執政黨內更是異聲四起，在在增加了馬英九處理此事的阻力。再加上「陰謀論」、「公報私仇」、「東廠濫權」等種種議論，也使得馬英九這次「鍘王」的動作，平添不少議論。

最明顯的對照是，王金平的圓融通達，使得多少政壇內外朋友願意站出來幫他講話，使他看起來雖理不直也能氣定神閒；相對的，馬英九和黃世銘的高調寡和，磨刀霍霍之餘，便被認為太過決絕而不近人情。但這也是政治的吊詭：「是非」與「人情」之間，常常處於一種拔河的狀態，若過度強調人情，便不免模糊了是非；若過度強調是非，又不免消損了人情，馬英九和王金平所代表的正是兩種不同典型。

然而，在民主法治體制下，將「是非」和「人情」放在同一個天平上來衡秤，卻是一種危險行為。因為，「人情」和「人脈」的積累，常常是靠著「灰色地帶」的經營而來，它本身有時就是牴觸法治的行為。甚至可以說，台灣今天民主政治之所以無法提升，主要就是卡在這樣「人情過度旺盛」的瓶頸，而使法治困陷在深沈的人情流沙中，而無法向前推移。也因此，人們如果拋開「政治鬥爭」的思維，而從「法治化」的觀點看待鍘王案，或許不難找到積極的意義。

從政治現實看，「馬王心結」當然不可能不存在；但從政治理想看，人們更關心的不是兩人恩怨的拉扯，而是台灣欲進不前的情勢要如何打破。王金平的議長職務一旦發生位移，朝野對峙的均勢將發生排山倒海的變化，政治局面必將愈發險峻；但至少目前不戰、不和、不死、不活的僵局可以打破，政局也就有改造的希望。其關鍵則在，人民希望國家往什麼方向走下去？

平情而論，馬英九此次處理王金平案不無值得商榷之處。第一，剝奪一名國會議長的資格是何等大事，過程之中，言詞拿捏是否準確、程序是否周當，皆有再斟酌的空間。第二，馬總統指關說案是台灣「民主法治史上最可恥的一天」，未免言過其實；至少，比起陳水扁以總統犯下之貪瀆案，此案堪稱小巫。第三，執政黨對於考紀委員的身分過度保密，馬英九不僅在會前對「懲處規格」提出呼籲，再又親自臨會發言，就程序正義而言，恐生議論。

無論如何，馬總統在低迷的政治氣氛中，選擇以不惜震盪政局的方式對王金平開鍘，以樹立「反關說」的法治標竿，顯示了他奮力一搏的決心；這既是凶險絕倫的一擊，也可能是他為台灣法治起沉?、掃積弊最勇敢的一役。重要的是，接下來要面對的一波波反撲，他除了要保持冷靜，也必須設法號召人民的支持。