Now news has come that the SPOSID has launched an investigation into four judges at the Taiwan High Court and one prosecutor in Banciao, Taipei County for accepting bribes from a former Kuomintang lawmaker:
... the case involved the sudden change of a corruption verdict surrounding a branch of the Hsinchu Science Park in Tunglo, Miaoli County, a decade ago.
Ho Chi-hui, a former Miaoli County Magistrate and former Kuomintang lawmaker, was found guilty of corruption and sentenced to 19 years in prison for the case by a district court.
However, last May 12, the Taiwan High Court found him not guilty. Prosecutors appealed the verdict but were also surprised by the sharp turn in the court judgments, reports said.
Prosecutors reportedly wanted to talk to Ho yesterday. It was not immediately known whether he would agree to the request. They searched a local office of his but he was not present, reports said.
The Banciao prosecutor under investigation reportedly served as Miaoli County Chief Prosecutor and might have been asked by Ho to influence the judges on his behalf, reports said.
The investigators launched the raids early yesterday morning against the Taiwan High Court, the Banciao District Prosecutors Office and various offices and residences of people involved, reports said. Prosecutors from Taipei County and Miaoli County as well as money-laundering experts took part in the action, which mobilized over 100 judicial officers, according to media reports.
It is likely that Ho had a warning and made himself scarce. I would not be surprised if he's already booked his ticket to the PRC. If this case turns out to be based on solid evidence then what we have is an interesting case that highlights the connections between politicians, industry and judiciary. As MT pointed out, rather than focus like Joshua Keating on non-stories if one wants to examine corruption in Taiwan there are some basic key elements:
HEAVY INDUSTRY - GANGSTERS - POLITICIANS - LOCAL GOVERNMENT - LAND RIGHTS - CONSTRUCTION - JUDICIARY
A standard plot works like this.
A wants to build / expand an industry but needs the land from B before said construction can take place. A contacts Legislator C who the pressures Local Government Official D and Member of Judiciary E to force B to sell the land at a hugely deflated price under dubious legal ruling F.
A goes ahead with capital raising for investment and places orders for equipment, manpower and materials without first getting the legal impediments out of the way. Money is given to C as a bribe to grease the palms of D and E to make sure that B's land is available. Meanwhile landowner B is given 'incentives' to make a quick settlement by gangsters G who have been engaged by either A or C.
This formula is not one size fits all but rather for illustrative purposes. For obvious reasons the ordinary citizen B and media shy away from digging too deep owing to the involvement of G in the background.
Whilst it is good to see prosecutors going after graft, one wonders what would happen if they were very thorough in their job and examined all land deals in a similar fashion. I imagine that a certain ruling political party would start hemorrhaging elected members. Just a small amount of investigation into electoral fraud for example resulted in three by elections earlier this year owing to vote buying. Imagine if all elections were examined in a likewise manner.
Yet what makes me scratch my head is that whilst the public are all too familiar with the past and present corruption of the ruling party, they still go out and vote their members back in again (Diane Lee, Chiu Yi etc). Meanwhile the DPP are heavily punished for the slightest verbal transgression. Why do Taiwanese repeatedly reward people they surely suspect of breaking and openly flouting the law?
Answers?
a) They are bought off with money or promises of development that will benefit them personally.
b) The system is corrupt but works. People are used to a system so prefer consistency of a lack of rule of law rather than a situation where the law is upheld and it is more difficult for everyone to get a quick fix to a particular problem. Changing the system would mean many people changing their strategies for financial planning. The inevitable delays would scare away industry and business that knows how to work within the current system.
c) They don't care or are apathetic and believe nothing can be changed.
d) Corruption is so endemic it is institutionalised throughout the fabric of society.
Your suggestions welcome.
