Ker Chien-ming "Interrogates" the Prosecutor General in the Legislative Yuan

Ker Chien-ming "Interrogates" the Prosecutor General in the Legislative Yuan
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, Republic of China)
A Translation
September 27, 2013

Summary: Prosecutor General Huang Shi-ming was pilloried by over 20 opposition party legislators in the legislature. The ordeal has been described as a Cultural Revolution style "struggle session." DPP Party Whip Ker Chien-ming began his "interrogation" by referring to the wire tap transcripts. He then told Huang Shi-ming "You're a dead man." Huang Shi-ming was humiliated in the Legislative Yuan. That merely hurt his feelings. But Ker Chien-ming and other legislators' conduct, is a matter of right and wrong, one which undermines criminal justice on Taiwan.

Full text below:

Prosecutor General Huang Shi-ming was pilloried by over 20 opposition party legislators in the legislature. The ordeal has been described as a Cultural Revolution style "struggle session." DPP Party Whip Ker Chien-ming began his "interrogation" by referring to the wire tap transcripts. He then told Huang Shi-ming "You're a dead man." A legislator assumed the role of inquisitor of a judicial branch official. This trampled over the dignity of the judiciary. It also exposed the coarse and barbaric character of the Legislative Yuan.

The average person might assume that a lawmakers interrogating an official is perfectly normal. Therefore they reason that a legislator such as Ker Chien-ming interrogating Huang Shi-ming is perfectly natural. It is not. In this context, Ker Chien-ming is not a legislator. Ker Chien-ming is a key suspect in a criminal investigation being conducted by Huang Shi-ming and the Special Investigation Unit. His relationship with Huang Shi-ming is the relationship between the criminal who is under investigation and the case investigator. The venue was changed to the Legislative Yuan, and the status of the two men was suddenly reversed. The lawmaker became the investigator in his own criminal investigation. The inevitable result was an inversion of right and wrong and a travesty of justice.

Other legislators may question Huang Shi-ming. But Ker Chien-ming was a suspect in the case under investigation. He must recuse himself. Only this is consistent with his role in the investigation. He may not assume the role of "legislator" in this investigation. He may not take advantage of his position to intimidate those investigating him. On the very first day of the session, Ker Chien-ming mounted the podium to conduct his "interrogation." Altogether he mounted the podium four times to attack Huang. He even told Huang Shi-ming "You are a dead man." His behavior was a vivid illustration of his "I am a legislator. I am the real capo di tutti capi" mindset. He revealed his total lack of remorse for his influence peddling with the judiciary.

A legislator was able to "struggle session" techniques against those prosecuting him. He was able to brush aside his own criminal wrongdoing. What hope remains for criminal justice on Taiwan? If officials of the judiciary permit themselves to be cowed by flagrant intimidation and treated with contempt, how much dignity does the judiciary retain?

Ker Chien-ming's "performance" was not the only questionable element. The entire legislative process was biased in favor of Ker Chien-ming. It provided him with a bully pulpit. When Huang Shi-ming showed up at the Legislative Yuan, it was not because he was invited to make a special report. It was not because the Legislative Yuan decided to open a special investigation on influence peddling. It was because DPP legislators cited "unnecessary duplication" between the Special Investigation Unit and Internal Affairs Bureau. It proposed amending Article 63-1 of the "Court Organization Law," and abolishing the Special Investigation Unit. It demanded that Huang respond to questioning. This Judicial and Legal Affairs Committee question and answer session went on for eight hours. But the focus was almost entirely on the influence peddling case. Ker Chien-ming brazenly "interrogated" the Prosecutor General investigating his case. An endless swarm of Blue and Green camp legislators emerged from the woodwork, and rushed to his aid. With calls for Huang's blood, the Legislative Yuan turned itself into a "Surround Huang Save Ker" battlefield.

This spectacle of the legislature bullying the judiciary, gave people the creeps. In 2006, the Legislative Yuan amended the "Court Organization Law," and officially established the Special Investigation Unit. It stipulated that the Prosecutor General would be "nominated by the president, approved by the Legislative Yuan, and serve a four year term." the sponsor of the bill was Green Camp Legislator Tsai Chi -fang. Has the DPP forgotten that? In January 13 of that year, a Third Reading of the Bill passed. The legislature ringingly proclaimed that the Special Investigation Unit would prosecute even high officials such as "Ministers, the Speaker of the Legislature, and the President" for high crimes such as corruption. The media praised the move as an "historic step in judicial reform." Has everyone forgotten this? The Special Investigation Unit could prosecute even President Chen for corruption. Today it has merely tweaked a few of Ker Chien-ming and Wang Jin-pyng's whiskers. Yet the DPP is suddenly determined to scrap the Special Investigation Unit? Are Wang and Ker really more sacrosanct than the president? Or is the DPP helping the Chen family get payback against the Special Investigation Unit?

The Legislative Yuan brazenly provided Ker Chien-ming a stage on which to "interrogate" Huang Shi-ming. It brazenly enaged in political interference in the judiciary. The current legislature is clearly indifferent to right and wrong. It does not even bother to hide its public settling of private scores. How many bills affecting the public welfare have been shelved for no reason? Yet an "Abolish the Special Investigation Unit" bill specifically intended to help Ker Chien-ming and Wang Jin-pyng escape prosecution has been placed on the agenda and given top priority. The legislature's "aid corruption" tactics leaves people dumbfounded.

Over the last twenty days, amidst the tumult over the influence peddling scandal, the judiciary has remained silent. Does it really have nothing to say? Or do such political abuses warrant nothing more than turning the other cheek? Is the case nothing more than a political struggle? If it were, then the judiciary would be wise to avoid entanglement. But this case involves judicial independence and due process. People are hearing political rhetoric from only one side. They have no professional legal opinions to help them determine what is just. Under the circumstances, how can the public distinguish right from wrong? Huang Shi-ming was abused in the legislature. Some prosecutors have criticized Huang Shi-ming for not protesting to the chairman, and challenging the appropriateness of Ker Chien-ming's interrogation. They say he failed to demonstrate "grit." Their objection is correct. But they must not blame the victim. If Huang Shi-ming had protested, he probably would have had shoes thrown at him, in addition to being forced to resign.

Huang Shi-ming was humiliated in the Legislative Yuan. That merely hurt his feelings. But Ker Chien-ming and other legislators' conduct, is a matter of right and wrong, one which undermines criminal justice on Taiwan.

看柯建銘在立院「審問」檢察總長
【聯合報╱社論】
2013.09.27 04:48 am

檢察總長黃世銘在立法院遭到廿多名朝野立委輪番砲轟，被形容為一場「公審」。民進黨總召柯建銘在詢問關說案監聽譯文的內容時，還向黃世銘說出「你死了！」的話。這場「立委拷問司法」的大戲，不僅嚴重踐踏了司法的尊嚴，也讓立法院的粗暴鄙陋暴露無遺。

一般人或許以為，立委在立法院質詢官員，本是天經地義；也因此，柯建銘以立委身分在委員會質問黃世銘，自是理所當然。但其實不然，在此時此地，柯建銘無此資格。原因是，柯建銘是黃世銘及特偵組偵辦關說案之主要當事人，他和黃世銘是「被偵查者」與「偵查者」的關係；如果主場換到立法院，兩人的地位隨即因此對調，立法委員反過來就自己所涉案件質問司法人員，勢必形成「反偵訊」的倒錯態勢，對司法造成侵害。

亦即，其他立委可以質詢黃世銘，但柯建銘應該以「利害關係人」的身分，主動請求迴避質詢，這才符合角色分際，避免以「立委」身分對特定司法辦案人員構成不對等的威嚇或侵犯。然而，當天柯建銘不僅搶先登台質詢，並先後四度上台搶攻，甚至對黃世銘說出「你死了」這樣的威嚇言語。其作法，將「立委才是老大」的霸道心態表現得淋漓盡致，對自己所涉的司法關說則沒有絲毫悔意。

試想，立委如果可以用這種公審司法人員的方式，來抹掉自己的汙點或罪行，台灣的司法還有什麼陽光和希望可言？如果司法人員接受這樣的公然威嚇和侮蔑，司法還要向誰訴說尊嚴？

事實上，可議的不只是柯建銘，整個立法院的運作也充滿「為柯建銘作球」的偏頗心態。黃世銘之所以前往立院，並不是立法院邀請他去作專案報告，也不是立法院決議就關說案成立特別調查專案，而是民進黨立委以特偵組和廉政署「疊床架屋」為由，提案修改「法院組織法」六十三條之一，要求廢除特偵組，指名要他備詢。然而，在司法及法制委員會這場長達八小時的輪番質詢中，主要焦點幾乎全集中在關說案，不僅柯建銘赤膊上陣親自「審問」偵辦其案件的檢察總長，更不斷有各路藍綠立委為他跨刀助陣，殺聲震天，立院簡直把自己當成「圍黃救柯」的戰場。

這「政治霸凌司法」的一幕，教人看得毛骨悚然。二○○六年，立法院修改「法院組織法」將特偵組法制化，並規定檢察總長由「總統提名、立法院同意、任期四年」，當時領銜的提案人就是綠營立委蔡啟芳，民進黨難道忘了嗎？當年一月十三日法案三讀通過時，立法院還宣稱特偵組將專辦「部長、院長、總統」等高官的重大貪瀆違紀案件，媒體還誇讚此舉「為我司法改革跨出歷史性的一步」，大家都忘記了嗎？那麼，為何特偵組連陳水扁總統的貪瀆案都能辦了，如今，只不過拔了王金平和柯建銘幾根虎鬚，民進黨即急著要廢特偵組；難道王、柯比總統更神聖不可侵犯？或者是民進黨在幫扁家向特偵組報一箭之仇？

立法院公然上演柯建銘質問黃世銘的戲碼，毫不避諱的政治干預司法，說明當前國會不僅是非不分，更到了假公濟私而不暇遮掩的地步。試想，多少攸關國計民生的重要法案無故遭到擱置，而今天一個「廢特偵組」的法案，就為了幫柯建銘和王金平的關說案護航，立刻優先重裝上場；立院的厚黑戰術，令人三嘆！

同樣讓人好奇的，是在近廿天的關說案紛擾中始終保持靜默的司法界，是真的無話可說，或者對這樣的政治凌辱只能唾面自乾？如果此案只是純粹的政治鬥爭，司法人員避免捲入，自是明智之舉；但此案涉及諸多司法獨立性和程序公正性之爭，民眾聽到的都是片面的政治語言，而缺少專業的司法見解作為辨正，在這種情況下，社會的是非價值要如何建立？看到黃世銘在立法院遭到不當對待，還有檢察官指責黃世銘未向主席提出程序抗議，請求裁示柯建銘是否適宜質詢，有失鐵漢風骨。這個提法是對的，但責備對象卻是錯的；如果黃世銘當時這麼做了，他恐怕得準備迎接襲來的鞋子，還下得了台嗎？

黃世銘在立法院有多窘，只是他個人的感受問題；但被柯建銘和眾多立委作踐的，卻是台灣的司法和社會的是非。