The decision to hold another vote came following allegations by Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Legislator Chiu Yi (邱毅) that the failed motion had been rigged, and a report by the KMT’s Central Standing Committee on Jan. 13 blaming its defeat in the recent legislative by-elections on Chen for not pursuing the former president’s case vigorously enough.Aside from Chiu's allegations (which are ubiquitous and often proven utterly false) what is interesting is that the KMT Central Standing Committee saw fit to publish a report arguing that if the prosecutor had pursued Chen's case with more vigour then the KMT wouldn't have faired so badly in the recent legislative by-elections (two of the three caused by KMT legislators expelled for vote-buying). This indicates that the KMT regards the Chen Shui-bian case as one that is instrumental to breaking the DPP's will and generating public anger with the opposition. If this is the case, then the KMT has obviously got a vested interest in Former President Chen being found guilty. The more guilty the man, the more they can capitalise on that in their rhetoric and PR. What is also interesting is how the Control Yuan was seemingly pressured to make a new vote on impeachment after the first one failed. This time, the reasons given were at best suppositional:
The Control Yuan members accused Chen Tsung-ming of “inappropriate behavior” after he and then-minister of justice Shih Mao-lin (施茂林) were invited by Huang Fang-yen (黃芳彥), the former first family’s physician, to meet at Huang’s residence on Feb. 26, 2007. Prosecutors claim that Huang played a key role in the former president’s corruption cases. “What did they talk about at Huang’s house? We suspect there were criminal acts involved in the meeting. As the Control Yuan is neither a criminal investigation institution, nor does it have any judicial enforcement powers, we could only point out the facts and refer it to prosecutors,” Lee said.
The Control Yuan also said that Chen Tsung-ming had lied about the fact that he dined with Tsai Chu-hsiung (蔡竹雄) — a construction magnate and owner of the Polaris Garden Plaza, the first family’s former residence — who was involved in some of Chen Shui-bian’s cases.If the Control Yuan can only point out facts, why is Control Yuan Member Lee Ful-dien (李復甸) implying a criminal act without the firm evidence to back up such an implication? Sure if it's not a fact, by his own criteria the Control Yuan cannot report it. The KMT's possible (or likely?) involvement in the Chen Shui-bian case is given kindling to the fire by the way in which Ma went out of his way, without being prompted, to claim that the KMT was not involved:
KMT spokesman Lee Chien-jung (李建榮) quoted Ma as saying yesterday that he respected the Control Yuan’s decision to impeach Chen Tsung-ming and added that he never meddled in the judiciary.It seems that Chen had upset a range of people:
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Legislator Chiu Yi (邱毅), who had long accused Chen Tsung-ming of malfeasance, called the Control Yuan’s resolution “belated justice.”
Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) spokesman Tsai Chi-chang (蔡其昌) told a press conference that the party regretted that Chen Tsung-ming had ordered the judiciary to focus its investigations on DPP politicians while avoiding to do as much for KMT politicians. Tsai said the Control Yuan decided not to impeach Chen on Jan. 5, but after the KMT published a review of its defeat in the legislative by-elections on Jan. 9 — in which it blamed Chen for not pursuing the former president’s case vigorously enough as one of the reasons for its electoral failure — the KMT-controlled Control Yuan changed its mind.
Chen seems to have been in an impossible position. KMT: Not screwing Chen Shui-bian enough. You're costing us seats and you've got to go. DPP: Your vendetta against former and serving DPP politicians turned the judiciary into a political tool of retribution. But the last sentence of the article is one that took my breath away:
Meanwhile, last night all the members of the Special Investigation Panel tendered their resignations.
This is the same panel that held a press conference and shamefully vowed to find Chen Shui-bian guilty at all costs on pain of resignation. Seems that pain has come or is it that Chen has already been found guilty and is trapped in the never ending world of 'The Appeals Process' spending us the remainder of his sentence flitting between High and Supreme Court. In a world of symbolism and notional use of legal systems and law to write the historical record to one or another party's favour, with Chen and most of his family either behind bars or under investigation, the SIP has essentially done its job. It may be that the KMT had hoped to capitalise more on Chen's downfall but their constant hammering on the issue may have wearied a public that has both a very short term political memory and who have begun to see the glee of KMT politicians at the case in a different light: as at best schadenfreude, at worst a cynical attempt to discredit Chen's whole presidency and the DPP in one fell swoop in a case that has had numerous questions raised about its procedures and the validity of evidence.
Whatever Chen's crimes (and I certainly don't know enough to comment on specifics) the more his case drags out and is marked by irregularities such as a change of judges or the High Courts ignoring of the Supreme Court's rejection of their grounds to keep Chen detained, the more I get a sense of meddling and less a sense that justice is being impartially applied. Whether Chen is guilty or not, when I interview him later this month I will treat him with respect as the former President of this country and as a human being, not a political pawn.
