中华民国行政院新闻局局长苏俊宾致函美国“自由之家”
【大纪元2月26日讯】中华民国行政院新闻局局长苏俊宾致函美国“自由之家”（Freedom House）执行长温舍女士(Ms. Jennifer Windsor)，就中华民国修正集会游行法、特侦组独立办案、调查警民冲突、司法调查案等项详尽说明事实与进度。
苏局长在信中最后强调，中华民国将尽速通过“公民与政治权利国际公约”、“经济社会与文化权利国际公约”，并研修相关国内法令，落实民主政治。
苏局长署名的信函影本已于2月23日由中华民国驻美国代表处新闻组张组长鹰送交“自由之家”华府总部。
苏局长的英文信函如下：
Dear Executive Director Windsor:
It was an honor for Taiwan to be the first country in Asia to host a Freedom House conference to release its annual Freedom in the World report, and we appreciate the Freedom House delegation’s public affirmation of Taiwan as a “vibrant” democracy and “one of Asia’s success stories.”
At the same time, we have taken note of Freedom House’s expressions of concern regarding issues that arose in Taiwan in the latter half of 2008. We affirm Freedom House analysts’ focus on overall democratic progress and institutional trends rather than on isolated incidents, and we welcome its continued monitoring and constructive criticism of this government’s handling of all issues.
In this connection, I would like to offer for your researchers’ reference a few observations concerning developments in Taiwan which, we believe, demonstrate that our governmental institutions are indeed responsive to calls for progressive reform.
Safeguarding freedom of expression:
Revision of the Parade and Assembly Act
In response to criticisms of the Parade and Assembly Act following protests held during mainland Chinese envoy Chen Yunlin’s visit in early November 2008, our government has expedited reexamination of said act. On November 27, the Legislative Yuan’s Internal Administration Committee conducted a public hearing on proposed amendments. On December 4, the Executive Yuan Council (the Cabinet) approved a draft revision of the act and referred it to the Legislative Yuan for further consideration.
Reflecting popular consensus, whereas the act currently requires application to police authorities for permission to conduct public demonstrations, the draft version, which we expect to be enacted in the near future, requires only advance notification so as to enable government authorities and other affected parties to coordinate with the demonstrators in a timely fashion to ensure public safety.
Actually, the existing Parade and Assembly Act is in line with the laws and practices of other advanced democracies. In effect, the application system it prescribes has functioned as an advance-notification system. Police authorities are prohibited from evaluating or rejecting applications based on the views of applicants or the purposes of their demonstrations. They are allowed only to consider the practical details of time, place and methods of demonstration. Moreover, 99.7 percent of applications have been approved over the past two decades since enactment of the law, and demonstrators have virtually always conducted themselves in a peaceful and orderly manner.
Nevertheless, the present administration strongly supports revision of the Parade and Assembly Act, as demonstrated by the fact that President Ma Ying-jeou himself has long advocated the adoption of a simple advance-notification system, which was included as a plank in his presidential campaign platform.
Upholding due process of law
The Special Investigation Division of the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office have been criticized in recent months for improper treatment of former President Chen Shui-bian during their investigations of him on charges of corruption and money laundering. It has also been criticized for violating the principle of confidentiality of investigations by leaking information.
For the most part, however, knowledgeable critics have not claimed that SID prosecutors have violated any law. Rather, they have claimed that various legal provisions are constitutionally questionable, granting prosecutors too much discretionary power. These concerns are being squarely addressed.
On December 26, 2008 and January 23, 2009, the Grand Justices of the Constitutional Court handed down Constitutional Interpretations Nos. 653 and 654, which declare unconstitutional certain provisions of the Detention Act deemed to infringe on the rights of personal liberty and privacy of the accused. These interpretations, and anticipated revisions of the act in line with them, will ensure the accused’s full access to the courts during detention and prosecutors’ respect for the principle of lawyer-client confidentiality.
Meanwhile, in a pronouncement issued on February 11, the Control Yuan censured the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office for lapses in ensuring that its personnel keep information concerning ongoing investigations strictly confidential. The pronouncement places responsibility on the prosecutor-general for correcting this and other flaws in the conduct of the Special Investigation Division in a timely manner.
Further, to ensure that people’s constitutional right to personal freedom is not infringed upon, and following extensive dialogue among related government agencies, on January 1 of this year, the Legislative Yuan repealed the Anti-Hoodlum Act, whose provisions have come to be widely seen as unconstitutional.
Investigating accusations of police misconduct
and political persecution
Recent months have seen calls by foreign observers to establish independent commissions to investigate allegations of police misconduct in carrying out their duties to provide security during Mr. Chen’s November visit and of political persecution of former President Chen and other past and present Democratic Progressive Party government officials.
Currently, the Control Yuan is in the process of investigating the aforementioned allegations, and we believe its responsibility to fulfill its watchdog mandate must not be undermined by competing, overlapping, special commissions or prosecutors. In addition, the National Police Agency has carried out internal reviews and has disciplined several police officers for flaws in carrying out their duties during the visit of Chen Yunlin, and a court is hearing a suit filed by citizens against police authorities for violating their rights.
Regarding claims that since the present Kuomintang administration came into office, it has carried out a witch hunt against the Democratic Progressive Party by having public prosecutors selectively focus their investigations on former President Chen, his family and acquaintances, and DPP members—and that prosecutors have even fabricated evidence against them—a number of realities must be kept in mind:
˙ Most of those indicted as co-defendants in the Chen Shui-bian case, including his family members and in-laws, have opted to enter into plea bargaining, indicating that the charges for which they were investigated are by no means fabricated.
˙ The Special Investigation Division of the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office was established during the former president’s term of office, and the current prosecutor-general was appointed by him.
˙ Even before the SID’s establishment in April 2007, public prosecutors had launched investigations of President Chen, his wife and others in the “state affairs fund” corruption case. When President Chen’s wife was indicted on charges of corruption in November 2006, he was named as a co-conspirator but was not indicted until he stepped down from the presidency because, during his term of office, he was constitutionally immune to prosecution.
˙ Evidence of money laundering came to the attention of prosecutors belatedly because it had been suppressed by a former chief of the Investigation Bureau of the Ministry of Justice.
As for setting up independent investigatory bodies, however, it is legally problematic and, in this administration’s view, detrimental to the healthy functioning of our constitutional order. It should be understood that the Control Yuan is a separate branch of government that is constitutionally mandated to fulfill the role of public watchdog over government agencies. It is a permanently constituted investigatory-cum-supervisory body currently comprising 29 members who are empowered to concurrently pursue multiple investigations into allegations of malfeasance or illegal behavior on the part of public servants. Depending on its findings, the Control Yuan can order government agencies to take corrective measures and can monitor compliance with its orders; it can order the implementation of disciplinary measures; and it can refer cases in which public servants appear to have violated laws to the courts.
Affirming international covenants
as law of the land
To show our nation’s determination to promote freedom and democracy, the Executive Yuan Council recently passed a resolution calling for ratification of the United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the United Nations International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights. The process of ratification will begin soon in the Legislative Yuan and is expected to be completed in the near future, followed by the incremental adjustment of all domestic laws accordingly.
************
In closing, on behalf of the government of the Republic of China, I want to thank Freedom House for your long-term concern for freedom, democracy, and human rights in our nation, and for your objective and fair evaluations. I hope that in the future, all sectors of our society will have further opportunities to cooperate with Freedom House in working for greater freedom and openness at home and around the world on the basis of democracy and the rule of law.
To everyone at Freedom House, allow me to wish you a happy, fruitful, and auspicious Year of the Ox.
Sincerely,
Su Jun-pin
Minister
Government Information Office
Republic of China (Taiwan)
(http://www.dajiyuan.com)