tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-52609975201272069092024-03-19T05:50:41.887-07:00Human Rights at NCKUHuman Rights at a Taiwan Universityhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11976319611467243332noreply@blogger.comBlogger335125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5260997520127206909.post-51233033979817025092011-05-18T19:40:00.001-07:002011-05-18T19:40:24.377-07:00Fwd: A formal appeal for the resignation of the current university president based on whitewashing human rights abuses at National Cheng Kung University<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">---------- Forwarded message ----------<br>From: <b class="gmail_sendername">Richard John</b> <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:rdca25@gmail.com">rdca25@gmail.com</a>></span><br>Date: Wed, May 18, 2011 at 4:01 PM<br> Subject: A formal appeal for the resignation of the current university president based on whitewashing human rights abuses at National Cheng Kung University<br>To: <a href="mailto:em50000@email.ncku.edu.tw">em50000@email.ncku.edu.tw</a>, <a href="mailto:hhhwung@mail.ncku.edu.tw">hhhwung@mail.ncku.edu.tw</a>, <a href="mailto:mail@ms.cy.gov.tw">mail@ms.cy.gov.tw</a>, <a href="mailto:tahr@seed.net.tw">tahr@seed.net.tw</a>, <a href="mailto:tfd@taiwandemocracy.org.tw">tfd@taiwandemocracy.org.tw</a>, <a href="mailto:hefpp@hef.org.tw">hefpp@hef.org.tw</a>, <a href="mailto:scholarsatrisk@nyu.edu">scholarsatrisk@nyu.edu</a>, <a href="mailto:higher@mail.moe.gov.tw">higher@mail.moe.gov.tw</a>, <a href="mailto:peu03@mail.gio.gov.tw">peu03@mail.gio.gov.tw</a>, <a href="mailto:lchsiao@taiwandemocracy.org.tw">lchsiao@taiwandemocracy.org.tw</a>, <a href="mailto:moemail@mail.moe.gov.tw">moemail@mail.moe.gov.tw</a>, <a href="mailto:david92@mail.moe.gov.tw">david92@mail.moe.gov.tw</a><br> Cc: <a href="mailto:letters@taipeitimes.com">letters@taipeitimes.com</a>, <a href="mailto:editor@it.chinatimes.com.tw">editor@it.chinatimes.com.tw</a>, <a href="mailto:edop@etaiwannews.com">edop@etaiwannews.com</a>, <a href="mailto:editor@etaiwannews.com">editor@etaiwannews.com</a>, <a href="mailto:info@chinapost.com.tw">info@chinapost.com.tw</a>, <a href="mailto:info@taipeitimes.com">info@taipeitimes.com</a>, <a href="mailto:louwei.chen@msa.hinet.net">louwei.chen@msa.hinet.net</a>, Control Yuan <<a href="mailto:cymail@ms.cy.gov.tw">cymail@ms.cy.gov.tw</a>>, Prime Minister <<a href="mailto:eyemail@eyemail.gio.gov.tw">eyemail@eyemail.gio.gov.tw</a>><br> <br><br>THE MINISTRY OF EDUCATION<br>Taipei, Taiwan<br><br>18 May 2011<br><br>In 1999, university officials falsely accused me of plagiarism. They didn't investigate the claim or even inform me of the accusation until after I was dismissed. For obvious reasons, the Ministry of Education Appeals Committee rejected that claim. <br> <br>Yet an entry on the National Cheng Kung University web site (<a href="http://news-en.secr.ncku.edu.tw/files/13-1083-78482-1.php" target="_blank">http://news-en.secr.ncku.edu.tw/files/13-1083-78482-1.php</a>), dated May 4, 2011, includes the text: <br> <br>"Moreover, in view of the fact that the work authored by Associate Professor De Canio was involved in plagiarism and sold in public which went in violation of Articles 91 and 94 of the Intellectual Property Rights, NCKU could not continue his employment."<br> <br>Most people would read that text to mean the plagiarism claim was a fact, not a malicious accusation. Suppose someone spreads a false rumor thirteen years ago that a female professor was a prostitute. That accusation was never properly investigated and was formally rejected in a legal ruling. <br> <br>But thirteen years later, on the university's web page, the following sentence appears: <br><br>"Moreover, in view of the fact that the professor was involved in prostitution and public indecency which went in violation of Articles 88 and 89 of the Legal Decency Code, NCKU could not continue her employment." <br> <br>Other than the accusation, there is no difference in the wording of that sentence and the one on the NCKU web page. What does it say but that the woman was a prostitute? And the following text in no way contradicts the claim. It merely says the professor appealed to a committee (not necessarily on the basis of the prostitution claim) and was reinstated! Presumably she was a prostitute but reinstated.<br> <br>What is disingenuous about the text quoted here is, instead of admitting liability, that the university falsely accused me of plagiarism besides other false accusations (that I failed a student unfairly, etc.), the university implies the accusation of plagiarism was true! <br> <br>If that is not a devious and possibly libelous use of language I don't know what is. Pretending to issue an apology to me ("NCKU still expresses gratitude for his devotion to teaching in the past twenty years"), the university is doing the opposite. It's not merely whitewashing its actions, but justifying them, while further compromising my reputation; since now those accusations are widely circulated as facts.<br> <br>This is what the university has done with all its human rights violations. Instead of admitting, based on court and Ministry rulings, that it did something wrong, the NCKU web site makes it look like the university followed laws and due process of law throughout the dismissal process!<br> <br>So my "resentment" over "being declined for employment renewal in 1999," is a whitewashed way of saying I was illegally dismissed. If this is not Orwellian Newspeak, what is?<br><br>Nor was the case "dealt with by NCKU following the resolution of the Teacher Grievances Committee of the Ministry of Education," as the NCKU web site claims. "Dealt with" implies "properly handled according to legal remedy." But no official was punished for wrongdoing, there was no compensation, and no apology or even (as this web site shows) an admission of wrongdoing. So how was the case "dealt with"? <br> <br>If a student with a torn dress and bodily bruises complains her teacher tried to rape her, but I merely tell her not to "resent" a teacher's amorous overtures, can I say I "dealt with" the case? <br> <br>As for a similar abuse of language, Dr. Hwung should not regret I was "displeased," as he quaintly words it; rather he should regret that the university committed grievous human rights violations that would result in expulsion or forced resignations from most universities in the civilized world.<br> <br>Nor am I asking people to be "perfect," as Dr. Hwung mystifies the issue of legal rights violations. The law doesn't require perfection, only compliance, in the form of legal statutes or Ministry and court rulings. Based on all three criteria, the university's actions were, and in fact <i>are,</i> illegal, since <i>the university continues to refuse legal remedy, </i>as its web site plainly shows.<br> <br>The fact that neither the Ministry of Education nor the courts elected to punish NCKU officials is precisely the reason why they arrogantly post their smokescreen of words on the official NCKU web site with the confidence they can get away with it in Taiwan. <br> <br>The apologist for human rights violations, who calls himself the "Secretariat," blows more smoke on the web site by claiming the university "followed the required procedure." <br><br>How did soliciting and circulating false accusations follow "the required procedure"? Do you officials have a moral sense? You have children. Do you allow them to gossip about their classmates and circulate false rumors about them, the way the courts do? Then Taiwan has no future, and certainly no future as a democracy.<br> <br>The fact that my dismissal, despite numerous rights violations, was "approved" by the university "as a result of multiple rounds of review" only shows the sad state of affairs at National Cheng Kung University, which calls itself a top-ranked university in Taiwan. <br> <br>For the reasons stated above, I am formally requesting that the Ministry of Education start action to remove the current university president, Hwung-Hweng Hwung, from office. Frankly, I think the entire administration at National Cheng Kung University should be formally dissolved and all committees and officials reappointed under Ministry control and invigilation, with each official and committee member required to swear an oath to obey the law; otherwise law will never be established at this university; and, frankly, by the time this case is formally resolved, with international help, I believe NCKU will lose its reputation as a top-ranked university in Taiwan.<br> <br>Sincerely,<br><br>Richard de Canio<br>formerly, Associate Professor<br>Department of Foreign Languages and Literature<br>National Cheng Kung University<br>Tainan, Taiwan<br> </div><br> Human Rights at a Taiwan Universityhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11976319611467243332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5260997520127206909.post-42008183158490498772011-05-18T07:39:00.001-07:002011-05-18T07:39:21.677-07:00Fwd: Regarding the National Cheng Kung Web Site<p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEitzijLeMxGYyoAQOd40cJ8JTZhXrEkQGghn41EYsuP-cC1D7BNhzE7GlRvlqhabz_Bpwxu7ngvEpiXO4ifnrWJjfhQOXRwMn7svM7jOJIIuZnlyNMTw87JGwjWAMwEzewTMtxcNIfshbUG/s1600/jmie2-761678.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEitzijLeMxGYyoAQOd40cJ8JTZhXrEkQGghn41EYsuP-cC1D7BNhzE7GlRvlqhabz_Bpwxu7ngvEpiXO4ifnrWJjfhQOXRwMn7svM7jOJIIuZnlyNMTw87JGwjWAMwEzewTMtxcNIfshbUG/s320/jmie2-761678.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5608065769356199858" /></a></p><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">---------- Forwarded message ----------<br>From: <b class="gmail_sendername">Richard John</b> <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:rdca25@gmail.com">rdca25@gmail.com</a>></span><br>Date: Mon, May 16, 2011 at 12:14 AM<br> Subject: Regarding the National Cheng Kung Web Site<br>To: <a href="mailto:em50000@email.ncku.edu.tw">em50000@email.ncku.edu.tw</a>, <a href="mailto:hhhwung@mail.ncku.edu.tw">hhhwung@mail.ncku.edu.tw</a><br><br><br><div><div> <div><div> <div> 15 May 2011<br><br>Dear Colleagues,<br><br>Recently this so-called "explanation" was recently posted on the NCKU web site at<br><a href="http://news-en.secr.ncku.edu.tw/files/13-1083-78482-1.php" target="_blank">http://news-en.secr.ncku.edu.tw/files/13-1083-78482-1.php</a><br> <br>Farcical as it is, I must address glaring errors in the statement titled "A Letter of Explanation for the Discontinued Employment Case of Associate Professor Richard De Canio," dated March 4, 2011.<br></div> <div style="float:right"> <table summary="" width="100%" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td> <div> </div> <br></td> </tr> <tr> <td> <br></td> </tr></tbody></table> <p> <i> Recently, Dr. Richard de Canio, former associate professor of Foreign Languages and Literature Department of National Cheng Kung University (NCKU), has delivered email messages where he conveyed <span style="background-color:rgb(255, 255, 51)"> resentment at his being declined for employment renewal in 1999</span>. This case, as I understand it, was dealt with by NCKU following the resolution of the Teacher Grievances Committee of the Ministry of Education. Dr. de Canio was re-employed and reimbursed with the overdue salary. <span style="background-color:rgb(255, 255, 102)">Legal procedures were carefully observed. </span>In 2010, Dr. de Canio retired from NCKU at the legal retirement age.</i></p><p><br></p><p style="background-color:rgb(255, 255, 255)"><span>First, the law doesn't deal with "resentment." The law deals with laws and human rights. Resentment has nothing to do with the law or human rights. A person may or may not resent having money stolen; it's still a punishable crime.</span></p> <p><span style="background-color:rgb(255, 255, 255)">The circulation of a secret student letter containing false accusations has nothing to do with resentment. It's a violation of my rights, which includes due process of law, the right to defend against libel, and other rights. </span></p> <p>The denial of the right to be informed of accusations against me has nothing to do with resentment. The denial of appellant rights has nothing to do with resentment either.The right to be protected by a uniform law (not a special law for "foreigners") has nothing to do with resentment.</p> I find it comical in this so-called "explanation" that there is not a single mention of all the legal rights violations committed by National Cheng Kung University, the fourth-ranked university in Taiwan, with numerous long-standing academic exchanges with US universities. The administration wants my colleagues to believe this is just an issue of personal "resentment," as if rape can be handled by dealing with the woman's personal resentment.<br> <br>The case violated so many human rights that the Ministry of Education boldfaced them to be sure officials got the point; and, I was told by someone who knew my case at another college that it was actually used as an example for inaugurated officials of what <i>not</i> to do as an official. <br> <br>Yet there is no sense of shame among NCKU officials or faculty that their university is an example not of paradigm justice, but of the miscarriage of justice. This is not mentioned in the self-serving "explanation" on the NCKU web site. Nor are the numerous violations committed by NCKU officials. This is "revisionism" of the kind Taiwan deplores in the "comfort women" issue, Nanking, or the 2-28 incident. Why do you accept it in my case?<br> <br>Human rights violations included: <br><br>Making unsupported, unproved, or uninvestigated accusations.<br><br>Failure to notify the accused of those accusations. (I heard I was dismissed after the fact.)<br><br>Failure to allow the accused to defend himself at the first (departmental) meeting, which I heard of only after the fact, as stated above.<br> <br>Soliciting and circulating a secret accusatory letter at "appeal" and "review" meetings.(Orwell would have loved the Newspeak at NCKU, where "oversight" committees are "coverup" committees. For some of you who need to be told, the purpose of an oversight committee is to protect the appellant, not to protect corrupt officials.)<br> <br>Failure to apply a uniform law, the Teacher's Law, to the professor, presumably because he was a "mere" foreigner from a country that has invested millions defending Taiwan and complicating its international relations to insure stability and prosperity in Taiwan for half a century, without taking credit away from the millions in Taiwan who have worked hard to deserve their prosperity. The real point is we Americans accord Taiwanese the exact same Constitutional rights native Americans have; we deserve the same respect. But committee members kept repeating the dismissal action. Either they knew I was being treated by a different law and didn't care about justice, or they didn't care what the facts were, which means they still didn't care about justice. Presumably it was sufficient they sat at the committee for the time required, indifferent to the fate of an American citizen who was being deprived of his rights. "After all, he must be guilty or why would they have dismissed him?" That's not democracy; that's authoritarianism.<br> <br>Failure to observe due process when the dismissal was canceled in December 1999. The university then disingenuously treated the case as a hiring action, not a dismissal action, and returned it to the department for further "review" (Orwellian Newspeak again). You, my colleagues, show me a single case of a person who goes through an appeal, has an action against him canceled, and then wins nothing but the opportunity to be reviewed again. A man goes to court charged with theft. The jury acquits him. The prosecutor then starts the case again, since the accused is from Taiwan and is not protected by human rights (the right to a single trial ending in a verdict).<br> <br>Mend the hold. "Mend the hold" is a legal term meaning accusations change until one of them sticks. The term may have come from wrestling where one tries one disabling hold and if that doesn't work one tries another. This is illegal in US law. I can't fire someone for being late and when he successfully defends himself against that claim he's being fired for another reason (being drunk, rude, stealing, etc.).<br> <br>"Mend the hold" is related to another action illegal in US courtrooms but apparently legal in Taiwan courtrooms, namely "estoppel," the principle that disallows one party in a legal action to contradict a previous claim either explicit or implicit. <br> <br>Now the university held numerous "appeals" and "reviews" in my case (there's Orwellian Newspeak again) and attended the one in Taipei. But when it lost it then claimed I had no right to appeal in the first place. <br> <br>None of this duplicity is mentioned in the so-called "explanation" on the NCKU web page. Taiwan students and professors in the US are protected by the same rights as Americans, but the NCKU administration had no shame going to court and claiming Americans were not protected by the same rights as Taiwanese in Taiwan. Yet NCKU maintains academic exchanges with numerous universities in the United States. If that is not selfish duplicity I don't know what is. <br> <br>Even worse, after NCKU loses the appeal at the Ministry of Education, which it never contested during the appeal itself, it then argued I had no right to appeal. Have i touched a nerve of conscience among my former colleagues yet, or am I wasting my time?<br> <br><p> <i>I regret that Dr. de Canio was <span style="background-color:rgb(255, 255, 102)">displeased </span>with how the case was handled. Should similar cases occur in the <span style="background-color:rgb(255, 255, 102)">future</span>, in the administrative procedure, <span style="background-color:rgb(255, 255, 102)">the faculty's rights and interests will be the primal concerns</span>. Emotional, rational, and legal perspectives on the cases will be equally considered to avoid <span style="background-color:rgb(255, 255, 102)">sense of resentment</span> by the faculty concerned. I believe <span style="background-color:rgb(255, 255, 102)">few people are perfect </span>in this society of great variety. It is my hope that we <span style="background-color:rgb(255, 255, 102)">tolerate</span> and <span style="background-color:rgb(255, 255, 102)">encourage </span>each other. With <span style="background-color:rgb(255, 255, 102)"> happy mood</span>, we work together to <span style="background-color:rgb(255, 255, 102)">contribute to the society </span>in pursuit of <span style="background-color:rgb(255, 255, 102)">the true, the good, and the beautiful</span>. With this good faith, I hereby express my sincere gratitude for Dr. de Canio's devotion to NCKU for the past 20 years.</i></p><p><i> <br> Hwung-Hweng Hwung<br> President<br> National Cheng Kung University</i></p><p>The above is absolute nonsense and my colleagues must recognize it for what it is, mere diversionary rhetoric, and not very good rhetoric either. Human rights have nothing to do with being "displeased." Either human rights are enforced or they are ignored. If they are ignored National Cheng Kung University must be considered a rogue institution, not a legitimate academic institution; not only because human rights are violated there without remedy but because if human rights are violated there is no insurance that academic standards are being maintained. If professors cannot rely on due process of law to protect their conscientious actions (say, disputing a student grade or research), it will discourage such conscientious actions, thus compromising academic standards. If I see a student unfairly passed but fear retribution from my colleagues; or if I detect spurious lab work but fear retribution if I report it; or know a female colleague who was sexually assaulted I fear retribution if I report it, clearly the university has compromised its future reputation. Which is exactly what happened in my case, where faculty's consciences presumably were seared shut by their relationships and their fear of losing them and thus compromising their own tenure. Even former students of mine for whom I wrote reference letters or assisted in other ways compromised me. That's why I don't depend on relationships; I depend on God: "If God is for us, who can be against us?" (ROMANS)<br> </p><p>As for "future" remedy, I am concerned with <i>past </i>remedy as well as <i>future </i>remedy. I don't care about the rhetoric of what the university will do in the future. It does not change what happened to me and the fact that it must be formally resolved. <br> </p><p>The rape victim wants to be sure the rapist doesn't rape again but also wants the rapist punished for his previous rape. I know of no rape victim who would be satisfied without a prison sentence even if the rapist volunteered for chemical castration, thus insuring he could never rape again. That may insure an early release from prison but would not replace a prison sentence. <br> </p><p>I want my case handled according to international principles of justice, and, as God is my witness, I will do everything within legal channels to insure that. <i>There will never be a compromise on this issue</i>. The sooner my former colleagues realize this, the more surely you will insure administrative justice to protect the long-term reputation of your university, even if that includes the removal of Dr. Hwung Hwung-Hweng as university president, which I will require as part of a settlement once this case is exposed.</p> <p>As for "tolerate," we tolerate transgressions; the person who accidentlly bumps into us on the street; the father who forgets our birthday; the spouse who forgets Valentine's Day; the bad weather; the electrical outage. We never tolerate injustice. To do so is unjust; it's social suicide. My former colleagues must understand this. The social injustice you tolerate today will come back to haunt you or your children in months or years to come. As the Bible (Hosea) says, who sows the wind, reaps the whirlwind. <br> </p><p>And yes, we should "encourage" one another: We should "encourage" one another to enforce justice and human rights. That is all Plato meant by the good, the true, the beautiful. Plato would not wish to encourage others to cover up the abuses of their colleagues. Plato would not consider the circulation of a secret letter "good"; or false accusations "true"; or corrupt officials "beautiful." Corruption is never beautiful; it is the very meaning of disfigurement, which means "ugly," since corruption disfigures the law, which, as the Hebrews taught us in Psalm 119, is beautiful.<br> </p><p>As for "happy mood," mental patients on medication have happy moods. Drug addicts have happy moods, for a brief time at least, until they "come down" into the real world, which Sigmund Freud, at the very end of <i>Studies in Hysteria</i> called "the common misery of everyday life." When you face life squarely, as the Greek tragedians did, as the biblical prophets did, there is no cause for the happy mood you speak of. Only those living in deliberate denial of the injustices around them can cultivate a happy mood. <br> </p><p>Can you feel a happy mood over the injustices I've suffered at National Cheng Kung University? Over the fact that the student who wrote a secret accusatory letter against me is now teaching at our university? Over the fact that she was never punished by the court for doing so? Over the fact that a former student of mine, for whom I wrote a reference letter for admission to a university abroad, supported that student when I took her to court and claimed to believe her word over mine, his former teacher, even though the student had not a shred of proof? Can you feel a happy mood over the fact that he's now Dean of the College of Liberal Arts and, hence, shaping the minds of current students at this university, who are the future franchise and colleagues of Taiwan? Can you feel a happy mood over the fact that the current Chair of the Department of Foreign Literature also supported that student who wrote an accusatory letter, despite the fact she had no evidence whatsoever that she failed unfairly and her accusation was eight years after the class, and, moreover, that I gave her three high passes the years she failed one grade?</p> <p>Perhaps your "happy mood" will change once this case is fully exposed in the international community, which will be sooner than you think.</p><p>Unfortunately, there's more of the same NCKU Newspeak below, which I feel compelled to address:<br> </p> <hr> <p><i>May 4, 2011<br><br></i> <i> It has been almost 12 years since 1999 when the employment of Associate Professor Richard De Canio was <span style="background-color:rgb(255, 255, 102)">discontinued </span>by National Cheng Kung University (NCKU). The resolution to discontinue his employment followed the <span style="background-color:rgb(255, 255, 102)">required procedure</span>. It was approved by the Faculty Evaluation Committee of Foreign Languages and Literature Department (where he was teaching) in its four meetings, by the College of Liberal Arts Faculty Evaluation Committee in its four meetings, and by the University Faculty Evaluation Committee as a result of multiple rounds of review. However, this discontinued employment case came to an end in 2003 when NCKU reinstated his employment following the district court decision made upon his appeal. In addition, the lawsuit concerning his petition for national compensation on his case was judged three times and rejected two times by the Tainan District Court. Eventually, the case was closed in 2007 after it was rejected four times by the Taiwan Supreme Court Tainan Branch.</i></p><p>Are you being facetious here, because you may be crossing the line of actionable libel. Please think of what you're publishing here. My employment was <i>not</i> "discontinued." You make it sound like it was a legal action; like the university had the right to review whether it would continue my employment or not. That was the disingenuous argument used by the university in claiming I was not protected by the Teacher's Law. <br> </p><p>But we know for a fact that both the Ministry of Education and the Taiwan court rejected that claim. So be careful what you write, because you may be crossing the line into libel. I was <i>illegally</i> <i>dismissed</i>, by definition (i.e. the MOE Appeal ruling, the court rejection of the claim foreigners are not protected by the Teacher's Law). (The issue why a university with academic exchanges with democracies abroad would even claim that in the first place is itself a serious human rights and reciprocity issue. Has NCKU no sense of shame?) And what do you mean by "followed the required procedure"? <br> </p><p>Again, I caution National Cheng Kung University you may have crossed the line into libel. If you had followed the "required procedure" the Ministry of Education Appeals Committee would not have overturned the decision and <b>boldfaced </b>human rights violations throughout their decision (by the way, why don't you post the Ministry of Education ruling, or a link to it, since you want to "explain" what happened?); nor would members of the Teacher's Union have repeatedly warned departmental, college, and university committee faculty that they were engaged in illegal actions. <br> </p><p>It's a proved fact that what the university did was illegal. The fact that it was "approved by the Faculty Evaluation Committee of Foreign Languages and Literature Department" doesn't mean it was just or legal by criteria established in law and by the Ministry of Education. We know for a fact all the NCKU committees committed numerous human rights violations rehearsed above: circulation of a secret letter at a meeting chaired by Lee Chian-er; unproved accusations at a meeting chaired by Li Chung-hsiung; defiance of a legal Ministry ruling by former president Kao Chiang; the refusal to implement the Teacher's Law, which both the Ministry of Education and the Taiwan courts called illegal. <br> </p><p>(I won't even mention the illegal dismissal of 1994, when Ren Shyh-jong was chair, which used spurious (undated, unsigned, unclassified) "student evaluations." That dismissal was overturned, comically, by a single vote, despite the obvious illegality of the action, since I wasn't even informed of the "evaluations" until after I was dismissed and the "evaluations" were discredited. Then the committee minutes, I was told, was forged, to make it look like the committee had advised me to be a better teacher when members of the Teacher's Union who sat on the committee insisted no such vote occurred; but that helped the chair in charge of the dismissal action to save face. I can't help wondering all my colleagues care about are "face," "relationships," and "the harmony of the whole." That's not the way to advance a university to international standards.)<br> </p><p>Additionally, what are you talking about by using the phrase "required procedure"? All the NCKU committees did was rubber stamp decisions made by each other committee, and even defying the Ministry of Education ruling. Do you call that "required"? Is that legal in your definition of "legal"? When I went to a law professor on campus after my dismissal was canceled in December 1999 he opened a law book and pointed to a specific law with his forefinger and kept telling me to go to the personnel department to pick up my retroactive contracts; he had a hard time believing me when I told him the university said that as a foreigner I had to be reviewed again. I wonder if your family were treated the same way in America if you would call that "legal" and "required procedure."</p> <p>As for the case being "closed," no human rights case is ever closed. We're still debating issues of slavery, of the Nazi holocaust, of restitution for Chinese and Korean "comfort women"; we're still punishing holocaust camp guards, we're still debating the 2-21 incident and the Rape of Nanking. <br> </p><p>I appeal to my enlightened colleagues, does it seem reasonable that university officials circulated libelous accusations against me yet the Taiwan court rules it's not libel because the accusations were not circulated outside the university? Google for the word "libel" on the Internet. Every single definition of libel says clearly that a false accusation is libel if one other party (apart from the discredited party) reads (or, in the case of slander, hears) the false accusation. Yet dozens of faculty members read or heard the false accusations against me; in fact they were told me by students even as of last year (see attached), that they heard rumors that I unfairly failed a student and the rumors favored the student (now NCKU professor); yet the court rejected that as libel on the claim it did not circulate outside the university, even though it seriously damaged my reputation within the university to the present day as the student attachment shows!<br> </p><p>Try to understand the implications of such a ruling. Implicitly the court is saying it's all right to disseminate false accusations against a professor in a university. Can't you see the implications here? A court should act as a deterrent to prevent similar false accusations in the future; instead it's implicitly encouraging (or at least not discouraging) university faculty and officials to disseminate spurious claims about colleagues. The court is saying there will be no penalty if you do that. Can't the more enlightened colleagues at this university see the dangers in such a ruling? If you have nothing to lose by circulating false claims about a colleague you're more likely to do so than if you, and the administration, feared severe penalties, both civil and possibly criminal as well. That's how lawful relations are established, or at least as lawful as we can hope from a corrupt human nature.<br> </p><p>But there's another issue even apart from the court ruling. Why would a university, presumably among the more enlightened institutions in a society, even contest compensatory claims? The university should have willingly admitted compensatory debts to a colleague who was illegally dismissed. If my child injured your child, first I wouldn't go to court to avoid a compensatory claim (hospital bills, loss of schooling, emotional trauma, psychological counseling, etc.). <br> </p><p>What kind of university would appeal a legitimate compensatory claim like mine? I had to fly back and forth to renew my visa. I lost valuable time teaching, which can never be restored; and I count five rather than four years, since my fifth year back was not guaranteed early enough in the schedule so I got leftover speaking and writing classes. The damage to my academic career over five years was immense. The costs of court action were quite high. I dedicated years fighting this case (to the present day in fact, as in this letter), reading and writing to defend myself, picking up numerous documents at about eight different Tainan post offices, sometimes three a day at three different post offices (often the apartment buzzer awakening me to go downstairs to sign for one of numerous documents from the university, Ministry of Education, courts, etc. A colleague has drawers full of those documents. Where's the compensation for that? <br> </p><p>As I said in a previous email, if your child is kidnapped and held ransom for four years would you consider it justice if the kidnapper is required only to return the child? If your child's advanced studies are interrupted by spurious accusations of cheating at an American university and the case extends over four years, would you consider it justice if the child is merely reinstated? If an American university administration treated your child like that would you consider that fair or would you and thousands of Taiwanese protest?</p> <p> A Taiwanese taekowondo athlete is accused of cheating (and there's no proof the accusation was improper) but Taiwanese immediately take to the Internet; newspapers that ignore my case buzz with anger over the incident; one Taiwan citizen even throws stones at a South Korean children's school (yes; attack children; is that the way to establish justice in Taiwan?); yet you tolerate grievous human rights abuses against an American at your own university and "tolerate" officials who, presumably, represent, "the good, the true, and the beautiful." <br> </p><p>I ask you once again, why would the university not willingly give compensation, much less vigorously contest compensation? You're supposedly fourth-ranked in Taiwan. Can't you see what is at stake? "What shall it profit to gain the whole world?" You're risking the reputation of a university that it took decades to establish.<br> </p><p><i> The resolution to discontinue the employment of Associate Professor De Canio by NCKU was based on the following reasons. Since his course had been cancelled for a shortage of required number of enrolled students in four consecutive semesters, it would undermine the rights of students to study and the opportunities of local teachers to be employed. NCKU hence discontinued his employment as a foreigner in accordance with the Employment Service Law. Moreover, in view of the fact that the work authored by Associate Professor De Canio was involved in plagiarism and sold in public which went in violation of Articles 91 and 94 of the Intellectual Property Rights, NCKU could not continue his employment. However, he appealed to the University Teacher Grievances Committee and the Teacher Grievances Committee of the Ministry of Education; further, he filed the lawsuit for the applicability of Teachers Law to foreign teachers. With the decisions of the appeals and the lawsuit, the Ministry of Education stated in its letter to NCKU that the school should reinstate his employment and reimburse his salaries. Accordingly, NCKU issued to him his employment contracts, his salaries, year-end bonuses, and academic research stipends for the period between 1999 and 2003.</i></p><p>As for the reasons given above, I won't go into them because they involve issues that are not of primary importance in this case. If a woman is raped it doesn't matter whether she was walking out late at night, sported high heels, wore seductive lipstick, or even if she teased the man or cried "stop" during a consensual sexual act. Rape is rape. Period. There's no tolerance for rape. <br> </p><p style="color:rgb(0, 0, 0)">The fact is the university made false accusations. It circulated a secret letter, even at so-called oversight committees. The university denied due process of law. The university denied I was protected by the same laws that protect Taiwan teachers. Finally the university refused to enforce a legal Ministry ruling even though it attended appeal hearings in Taipei. These are the issues that should be resolved. These are the issues that must be resolved. These are the issues that will be resolved, sooner or later. </p> <p>One issue I will address is the issue of plagiarism. First, I deny it was plagiarism, as I will elaborate below. Second, how can a university claim to dismiss a professor for plagiarism if it doesn't even inform the professor of the accusation or investigate the accusation, or even have regulations defining plagiarism? Moreover the entire action was hypocritical since it was well known that plagiarism was rampant in Taiwan and several high officials were found to have plagiarized, with impunity, apart from the bad publicity. <br> </p><p>The law must not only be written, with specific criteria, it must be applied impartially. From what I was told plagiarism was so rampant among Taiwan professors that some US academic journals had a blacklist of those names. Whether true or not I cannot attest. The main issue here is the selective application of laws which, in my experience, is common here. <br> </p><p>For example, many teachers don't have enough students in their courses, but the department routinely allows it or gives extracurricular work (library, etc.). This only becomes an issue when a teacher is disliked, in which case the law is being applied in a discriminatory manner and it's no longer really law in a constitutional sense (i.e. equal enforcement). I know for certain that if I forgave one student for cheating on her exam, I would absolutely forgive all students, or vice versa; like when I told a tearful student, "I'm sorry, but I failed a student last year for that and I can't make an exception of you." One student was disrespectful and a troublemaker but when many students transferred to my Public Speaking class due to a colleague's illness, I allowed him in, because I allowed the other students in, and I don't believe in acting in a discriminatory manner.<br> </p><p>The law (like St. Paul's definition of God) is no respecter of persons. This refers back to my earlier reference to "mend the hold." I was also accused of teaching different courses, for which I was not hired. <br> </p><p>First, I should be respected for working hard enough to extend my academic range. Over the years I taught American Literature, British Literature, Public Speaking Critical Theory (from classical to postmodernism), Cinema, Bible Studies, Public Speaking (where students gave ONE SPEECH A WEEK that I had to analyze and discuss), and Composition. I wrote literally thousands of pages for my students over the years, now published in about 10 volumes of essays in the fields of fiction, poetry, writing, speaking, and cinema. One student joked years ago that her classmates said I wrote faster than they could read!</p> <p>Second, the same university that tried to dismiss me for presumably teaching "outside my specialty" then allowed me to teach the Bible, which was not in my specialty, the year after I was reinstated after being dismissed for not teaching in my specialty! Now where's the logic? First the university tries to fire me for not teaching my specialty then it actually allowed me to teach a Bible class that was not in my specialty once I was reinstated in 2003. Moreover it asked me to teach a Psychology class that was also not in my specialty!</p> <p>So you see there's a great degree of duplicity here. This is what George Orwell called "doublethink," where two points of view are maintained at the same time. <br></p><p>As for plagiarism, like beauty, it's in the eye of the beholder and covers a wide range of possibilities in the creative sphere, from the crude student copying of a complete text to the creative reworkings that is the basis of a great deal of art. Does <i>West Side Story </i>plagiarize <i>Romeo and Juliet</i>? We know that Brahms adapted the melody from Beethoven's <i>Ninth Symphony</i> for his melody at the end of his own<i> First Symphony</i>, but the relationship, though perceptible to most ears, is too distant to be called plagiarism in the invidious sense. <br> </p><p>Was Aaron Copland a plagiarist for using Mexican tunes in his superb orchestral showpiece, <i>El Salon Mexico?</i> Was he a plagiarist when he used a Shaker tune called "Simple Gifts" for a set of variations in his ballet <i>Appalachian Spring</i>. (The great film composer, Bernard Herrmann, angrily accused him of plagiarism; but no one thinks of it as plagiarism today, so far as I know). <br> </p><p>Recently Bob Dylan was accused of plagiarism for taking strings of words from an American Civil War poet in songs on one of his albums, <i>Love and Theft</i>. These were complete strings of words, with no change; yet he was mainly defended by the intellectual community for doing so. </p> <p>This doesn't even cover numerous pop tunes that adapt classical melodies. Neil Diamond took the melody from Mozart's famous Piano Concerto #21 for his song, "Song Sung Blue." He doesn't credit Mozart on the record. Paul Simon took the famous Hassler tune that Bach used in his Passions; neither Bach nor Hassler is credited on the record. There are hundreds of such examples. The US illustrator Norman Rockwell exactly copied the composition of a famous painter for his famous World War II illustration known as "Rosie the Riveter." Is that plagiarism?<br> </p><p>Are the numerous robot films (<i>RoboCop, Terminator</i> and too many others to mention) plagiarism? They can all be traced back to Fritz Lang's <i>Metropolis</i> in the silent film era. At what point does one "own" an idea, plot element, chord progression ("I Got Rhythm" has been used by numerous jazz musicians for their own compositions), or design? <br> </p><p>One 1960 film, <i>Homicidal</i> copied almost the entire plot of Alfred Hitchcock's <i>Psycho</i> (both 1960), with apparent impunity because Hitchcock never accused the director William Castle, of plagiarism, though we children couldn't stop laughing at the similarities between the two films (a killer dressed up as a woman, etc.) and one film followed the other in a matter of months, within the same year. A Clint Eastwood western adapted the plot elements of the western <i>Shane</i> with no credit; several recent films were almost direct "ripoffs" of previous films, without credit, such as a ripoff of Billy Wilder's <i>The Apartment; </i>while another film was traced to Jane Austen's <i>Emma</i>, just redone for modern audiences. <br> </p><p>Most scholars have observed that Bugs Bunny was plagiarized from Walt Disney's cocky rabbit in his early short <i>The Tortoise and the Hare</i>, but Disney ignored it, as even the creators of Bugs Bunny admitted. <br> </p><p>This issue is interminable. The plagiarism that I was accused of was not the crude kind where someone takes sentences from a book; I borrowed plot elements, as novelists and movie makers have done from time immemorial. <i>Apocalypse Now</i>, by the director of <i>The Godfather </i>films is obviously an updated version of Joseph Conrad's <i>The Heart of Darkness</i>. Everyone recognizes this; Coppola never credited Conrad, nor is he ever accused of "plagiarism" in the invidious sense. That's because he reworked his source material and made it his own. As the poet T. S. Eliot once famously said, "Small poets borrow, great poets steal." I don't consider myself a great poet but I certainly never plagiarized in the invidious sense implied by those accusations against me. Incidentally, while teaching at another college I picked up an ESL book that used the same story I used as a source of one my own stories; <i>there was not a single acknowledgment where the plot came from anywhere in the volume</i>. That book was printed by a major British publisher. <br> </p><p>But all of this is beside the point. University officials have a selective punitive policy that I'm familiar with. They can make an issue of anything they wish when they don't like you but ignore an issue when they do like you. I'm not going to reciprocate by saying my Taiwan colleagues committed blatant plagiarism with impunity, but such has been exposed to be the case even at top agencies in Taiwan. No action is taken against these people. And justice implies an impartial execution of laws. A law that is partially executed is no longer law even though the law itself is just. This kind of disparity of execution was all too familiar in the Jim Crow days of the Old South. It applies across gender lines too: A man with many sexual partners is "experienced" while a woman is a "slut."<br> </p><p> <i> On another front, Associate Professor De Canio filed a request for national compensation for entry and exit visa fees he had paid during his dismissal period. The Tainan District Court ruled that NCKU should refund his expenses for flights, hotel accommodation, lodgings and visa applications. Yet, an appeal by NCKU was approved so that the previous verdict was reversed, allowing the school to retrieve its compensation payments. In response, Associate Professor De Canio filed a complaint to the Taiwan Supreme Court Tainan Branch, which ordered the case be retried at the Tainan District Court. The retrial decision sustained that NCKU should make compensations. NCKU appealed to the Taiwan Supreme Court Tainan Branch, which ruled that NCKU was not required to compensate. Four subsequent appeals for retrial made by Associate Professor De Canio were dismissed. Thus, his lawsuit for national compensation was closed. As well, his lawsuit against a former student was lost and closed.</i></p><p>Regarding the above, the lawsuit may be closed, but not the issue. You must understand this. In a just society human rights issues are never closed; I discussed this principle above. Regardless of what the court ruled common sense requires the university to compensate an appellant for costs incurred while fighting the case, the interruption to his academic career, research, etc. <br> </p><p>I'm curious why Taiwanese follow the law strictly when it's in their favor but then defy the law when they think otherwise? Apparently the ruling that disqualified the Taiwanese athlete did not matter, even though there is no evidence of inequity. More to the point, why did the university defy a legal Ministry ruling until it was more or less forced to execute it, but then confidently appeal to the law when it's in the university's favor? <br> </p><p>Similarly, the university recklessly accepted the student's accusation against me and completed my dismissal in a few weeks, while I tried for years to punish the student and I'm told the student has rights. What is this, a joke? No student has a right to discredit a teacher without proof. If the university does not take action it's risking its international reputation sooner or later. <br> </p><p>I appeal to my more enlightened colleagues. If the court ruling that I'm not entitled to compensation is reasonable, then, like the ruling that circulation of false accusations within a university is not libel, this will obviously not deter universities from risking illegal dismissal actions, just as they can risk false accusations based on another court ruling, or students can risk writing malicious accusatory letters against teachers based on yet another court ruling. <br> </p><p>The law is a house built on numerous cases like mine and if the house is not built strongly enough, with a good foundation based on solid legal principles and human rights protections, then, when the first floods come, when hostile passions rule, the house will fall. <br> </p><p>The Law must be built on the solid rock of strong legal principles, such as estoppel, mend the hold, libel as defined in all law dictionaries of which I am aware, compensatory and punitive awards, due process, appellate rights, etc. Take away those principles, remove that rock, and none of us will stand with dignity. And we never know what we have until we've lost it. You may discover this too late, when it happens to you and the only people who can help are those cultured in the politics of silence.</p> <p>In any case, I will continue to pursue this case through all legal channels here and in other countries. The only way to end this case is to resolve it according to principles established in international human rights charters endorsed by your own president.</p> <p><br></p><p>Sincerely,</p><p><br></p><p>Richard de Canio</p><p>formerly, Department of Foreign Languages and Literature</p><p>National Cheng Kung University</p><p>Tainan, Taiwan<br></p><p><br></p><p><br></p> </div></div> </div></div></div> <img src="http://news-en.secr.ncku.edu.tw/images/clear.gif" alt=""> </div><br> Human Rights at a Taiwan Universityhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11976319611467243332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5260997520127206909.post-23133142855372434022011-04-02T02:05:00.001-07:002011-04-02T02:05:46.831-07:00Regarding human rights for an American citizen in TaiwanThe American Institute in Taiwan<br><br>April 2, 2011<br><br>Dear AIT Offiicials,<br><br>What are the options for an American citizen in Taiwan who is subject to egregiously unfair rulings under Taiwan's justice system.<br> <br>In 1999 I was illegally dismissed from National Cheng Kung University. The ruling was overturned by the Ministry of Education in January 2001, but the university refused to enforce that ruling for more than two and a half years (see attached).<br> <br>During the dismissal action the university claimed foreign teachers were not protected by the Teachers Law, itself a discriminatory claim by a high-ranked Taiwan university having numerous academic exchanges with reputable US universities. Then, although the university itself held appeal hearings and attended MOE hearings in Taipei, it claimed, after the appeal ruling favored me, that foreign teachers had no right to appeal and contested the Ministry ruling in court.<br> <br>Court rulings suggest a pattern of discrimination. Although university officials circulated accusations against me without attempting to prove them or even notify me of the accusations, the case was rejected on the basis the accusations were not published outside the university, even though they were used to effect my dismissal from the university and all libel statutes I have read say libel is committed if one person other than the plaintiff reads the false accusation.<br> <br>Similarly, the student who wrote a malicious letter against me was excused on the basis her letter did not directly cause my dismissal, though the letter was secretly circulated at several dismissal hearings and, in fact, was solicited for that purpose after initial accusations against me were discredited. (These are all facts documented in the university's own minutes.)<br> <br>Although university officials acted in reckless disregard of the law and of human rights (see attached), the courts imposed no punitive damages. Similarly, apart from retroactive salary, the courts awarded me no compensatory damages, though my academic career was interrupted for four years and I paid hundreds of thousands of dollars in court fees and travel costs to renew my visa, not to mention hundreds of hours spent writing letters (such as this one) over twelve years trying to obtain justice.<br> <br>I think officials in Taiwan believe that so long as foreigners are allowed to file lawsuits, justice is served, regardless of the outcome of the suit. It reminds me of a line from a Shakespeare play, "I can call the dead from their graves too, but will they come?" Sure, I can sue officials in Taiwan: but will I win?<br> <br>My request for compensation was denied by the courts on the claim there was no reason for me to reside in Taiwan to contest my case! How could I have contested my case in the United States? In another case, when an American returned to the United States during a custody dispute with a Taiwanese woman, the court ruled against him on the basis he returned to the United States and so showed he had no parental concern for the child. "Heads I win, tails you lose."<br> <br>Academic and cultural exchanges between nations can only take place on the basis of mutual respect, not evident in the university's misconduct or in court rulings on my case. I should add that not a single human rights group in Taiwan has responded to my request for assistance.<br> <br>Several years ago National Cheng Kung University students were caught illegally uploading copyrighted music and within hours several Taiwan lawyers volunteered pro bono assistance to those students. I find it odd that Taiwan lawyers were willing, in a matter of hours, to volunteer pro bono assistance to students who technically broke the law but, in thirteen years, not a single Taiwan lawyer has volunteered to take my case to uphold the law!<br> <br>The Latin words "pro bono" mean "for the good (of the cause)." But Taiwan lawyers seem to think that Taiwan students who illegally upload copyrighted music have a more worthy cause than an American teacher who is illegally fired. Is that the way to insure law and human rights in Taiwan?<br> <br>American legal aids daily volunteer their services to immigrant residents in America who find themselves in legal straits in cases more complicated than mine. Yet there is no attempt in Taiwan to reciprocate treatment to Americans.<br> <br>English-language newspapers have repeatedly declined to publish letters exposing my case. But within hours of the taekowondo incident Taiwan's press and the Internet bubbled with outrage over the perceived injustice suffered by a Taiwanese citizen and the athlete was promptly offered free legal assistance.<br> <br>I don't understand the disparity in handling these cases. The Taiwan people are given voice in the American congress, despite the many issues the American government is faced with daily. Yet not a single Taiwan legislator has voiced my case. Apart from law, how is the principle of reciprocity honored in Taiwan?<br> <br>I, or a Chinese colleague, have repeatedly sent letters (in Chinese and English) to the Ministry of Education, the Control Yuan, the Prime Minister, and Taiwan's president, to no avail. The letters aren't even answered.<br> <br>Surely the issues are plain enough to indicate discrimination against an American citizen in Taiwan, and so justify some kind of American mediation.<br><br>Thank you for whatever assistance I receive.<br><br><br>Sincerely,<br> <br>Richard de Canio<br>formerly, Associate Professor<br>Department of Foreign Languages and Literature<br>National Cheng Kung University<br>Tainan, Taiwan<br>(06) 237 8626 Human Rights at a Taiwan Universityhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11976319611467243332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5260997520127206909.post-70263259327695339872011-04-01T02:07:00.001-07:002011-04-01T02:07:42.483-07:00Legal Aid and Human Rights in TaiwanLEGAL AID FOUNDATION<br>Tainan, Taiwan<br><br><br>Thanks for your advice to contact the president of Taiwan. But I did that several times in the past, in both Chinese (by proxy) and in English. <br><br>I also repeatedly contacted other agencies, including probably two dozen emails to the Control Yuan and a face-to-face meeting with a Control Yuan official who declined to respond when I asked how the Control Yuan could ignore the university's misconduct. The official, through a translator, declined to answer and said he would contact a colleague and member of National Cheng Kung University's Teachers Union. He never did. <br> <br>You also recommended I contact the president of the United States. Frankly, I was hoping for legal assistance in Taiwan. To be fair, you argued you only take indigent cases. But I wish to address wider issues here.<br> <br>Several years ago National Cheng Kung University students were caught illegally uploading copyrighted music and within hours several lawyers volunteered pro bono assistance to those students. I find it odd that Taiwan lawyers were willing, in a matter of hours, to volunteer pro bono assistance to students who technically broke the law but, in thirteen years, not a single Taiwan lawyer has volunteered to take my case to uphold the law!<br> <br>What do the Latin words "pro bono" mean? They mean "for the good (of the cause)." <br><br>Taiwan lawyers seem to think that Taiwan students who illegally upload copyrighted music have a more worthy cause than an American teacher who is illegally fired. Is that the way to insure law and human rights in Taiwan?<br> <br>American legal aids daily volunteer their services to immigrant residents in America who find themselves in legal straits in cases less black and white than my own. Yet there is no attempt in Taiwan to reciprocate treatment to Americans.<br> <br>English-language newspapers have repeatedly declined to publish my letters exposing my case. But within hours of the taekowondo incident Taiwan's press and the Internet bubbled with outrage over the <i>perceived </i>injustice suffered by a Taiwanese citizen and the athlete was promptly offered free legal assistance. <br> <br>I don't understand the disparity in handling these cases. The Taiwan people are given voice in the American congress, despite the many issues Americans are faced with daily, including multiple military conflicts. Yet not a single Taiwan legislator has voiced my case in Taiwan's legislature. Apart from law, how is the principle of reciprocity honored in Taiwan?<br> <br>Moreover, this issue does not just concern me. It concerns a high-ranked university. If it is not a "good cause" to insure human rights at a high-ranked university, then what is?<br><br>Democracy is a house in daily need of repair and renovation. A small leak in the house, if ignored, can weaken the whole building. <br> <br>The law is built on case precedent and legal principles fought case by case. Academic writings don't establish law, they express opinions. <br><br>The law is a job of work, with numerous lawyers rolling up their sleeves and getting the job done in courts all over the country. If a person deprived of teaching for four years is not compensated, and if pro bono lawyers don't think that a "good cause," what kind of precedent is that in Taiwan law? <br> <br>If a person robs a bank and is merely asked to return the money, that is not a good precedent to deter bank robbers. If a person kidnaps a child for four years, is it right to say, as has been said in my case, the mother "won" because she got her child back? Will the courts not punish the kidnapper with a long prison sentence for the four years the mother lost her child? Should the courts not punish university officials for interrupting my academic career for four years?<br> <br>Should the National Cheng Kung University lawyer, who presided over appeal hearings at the university and even attended one at the Ministry of Education in Taipei, then be allowed to argue, out of both sides of his mouth, that a foreign teacher is not allowed to appeal? What kind of precedent is that in Taiwan law? <br> <br>A court is established on legal principles, or should be. It involves legal debate, not mere argument. Those principles are established to uncover the truth, and to protect right from wrong. <br><br>Democracy is not, as one of my students said in class, doing whatever you want to do! In the famous US court ruling, freedom of speech does not mean one can yell "fire" in a crowded theater. The law, in other words, is principled. Courts argue principles of law, not unprincipled opinions.<br> <br>"Estoppel" is one such principle. Whether that principle exists in Taiwan law is another issue. But some such principle must exist, assuming Taiwan courts are involved in legal debate, based on principle, laws, and reason ("what the common citizen would do or think"), and not mere contention (he says, she says; I want, she wants). <br> <br>Only a naive person believes court testimony is always truthful; but, in principle, testimony must always be truthful; and when it can be proved otherwise (as in the case with the lawyer), the court imposes (or should impose) penalties. <br> <br>It's a known fact the university held appeal hearings. It's a known fact the lawyer later said I was not entitled to an appeal. <br><br>The lawyer must have been lying in the first instance or in the second instance. Should a court, in principle, accept a lie as part of a legal argument?<br> <br>Saying there is no estoppel in Taiwan does not address the issue. The issue is, can there be law without a principle of estoppel? Can there be law if the court is a forum to conceal, instead of to reveal, the truth?<br> <br>In principle I should not be allowed to fire a person for always being drunk and then, when that is disproved in court, claim I fired him for always being late.<br><br>It's not true a person's court testimony is protected. That is true only if the facts are contestatory ("he says, she says"), not if the facts are independently verified, say by a video recording. <br> <br>If I swear in court I never beat my wife and a secret video shows otherwise, then I committed perjury, unless that video can be contested or the testimony defended on "reasonable" grounds. For example, I might not remember I beat my wife fifteen years ago; there's "reasonable" doubt that might protect my testimony.<br> <br>I think officials in Taiwan believe that so long as foreigners are allowed to file lawsuits, then justice is served, regardless of the outcome of the suit. It reminds me of a line from a Shakespeare play, "I can call the dead from their graves too, but will they come?" Sure, I can sue officials in Taiwan: but will I win?<br> <br>Am I supposed to boast of democracy in Taiwan because I can file a suit against powerful university officials even though, despite facts and a preponderance of evidence on my side, I cannot win? <br><br>Though Americans are supposedly liked and even honored in Taiwan in fact we are treated the way, for example, women were once treated in the US, but given half pay in the workplace; the way Americans are given half justice in Taiwan's courts.<br> <br>The facts are plain. Accusations were not even investigated but used to dismiss me. I wasn't even notified of the dismissal meeting. To insure my dismissal a secret letter was solicited. I read the letter only years later when I took the student to court. <br> <br>No one involved in these abuses was punished. Many were promoted. One is now chair, another dean. The university president who refused to enforce a legal Ministry ruling to reinstate me was later approved for a second three-year term as president. <br> <br>The courts awarded me no compensatory damages, though my academic career was interrupted for four years and I paid hundreds of thousands of dollars in court fees and travel costs to renew my visa, not to mention hundreds of hours spent writing letters (such as this one) over twelve years trying to obtain justice.<br> <br>Sincerely,<br><br>Richard de Canio<br>formerly, Associate Professor<br>Department of Foreign Languages and Literature<br>National Cheng Kung University<br>Tainan, Taiwan<br>(06) 237 8626<br><br>PS: This case has now entered its thirteenth year.<br> Human Rights at a Taiwan Universityhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11976319611467243332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5260997520127206909.post-74995676671092884092011-03-30T11:40:00.001-07:002011-03-30T11:40:08.076-07:00Human Rights at a Taiwan university<p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgIdOjlcQODTTXpPKPRLPMTrIqp88BEyfbEoU1GqZU1YbVsWkQIAvrgD1XDSETSNPiy69gh6l3IhVrU-_mK3NU_X9OagMSCJ8o9Znex3GxgVlwR-gCHs1SPuIBjEh_21zPIUWB1oPeKIh9Q/s1600/libertytimes-708077.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgIdOjlcQODTTXpPKPRLPMTrIqp88BEyfbEoU1GqZU1YbVsWkQIAvrgD1XDSETSNPiy69gh6l3IhVrU-_mK3NU_X9OagMSCJ8o9Znex3GxgVlwR-gCHs1SPuIBjEh_21zPIUWB1oPeKIh9Q/s320/libertytimes-708077.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5589944641110739298" /></a></p><p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjpgpRKDy6qAVw2KfmGDUIPqQEnl8ncbXO-UE2J_TsJdOxh4bIp2c_59lrx5BVy2mTK2M1tlsUNPRp24WmVYsJPajm-07VwKL4G5cREmePOhB8vvkebeby1uPARNKesNVLn3twhyphenhyphenJS4Cvb6/s1600/1-709387.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjpgpRKDy6qAVw2KfmGDUIPqQEnl8ncbXO-UE2J_TsJdOxh4bIp2c_59lrx5BVy2mTK2M1tlsUNPRp24WmVYsJPajm-07VwKL4G5cREmePOhB8vvkebeby1uPARNKesNVLn3twhyphenhyphenJS4Cvb6/s320/1-709387.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5589944644406220770" /></a></p><p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj1894AvTM-kFGGdeE4H-nMR1rA0VkbDBSvRK3Ff5TySbAVL02xLD5LpKhyMrO3YQYPYQ5Vpf7ZXsjQIZNLTSZ_FH032LE7M-jtV_wdwXNRE1AJ2jn2gDdPledpelZfg0GXvLuW5kqMkpfg/s1600/2-710024.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj1894AvTM-kFGGdeE4H-nMR1rA0VkbDBSvRK3Ff5TySbAVL02xLD5LpKhyMrO3YQYPYQ5Vpf7ZXsjQIZNLTSZ_FH032LE7M-jtV_wdwXNRE1AJ2jn2gDdPledpelZfg0GXvLuW5kqMkpfg/s320/2-710024.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5589944649897925538" /></a></p><p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgzAsPknqfDfBUn3h5SZnYq1GfqkBW-gYfLv-XpccLJ4CziIOglgEUMHbtnFoPspYab7QJD9_7OeU39gwNA1VA4gjkmlsul5Ex-dl5Ct6zJMy4-VbFHab6VOlwGqI3Jcm9AeiePjIyEbMWX/s1600/3-710688.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgzAsPknqfDfBUn3h5SZnYq1GfqkBW-gYfLv-XpccLJ4CziIOglgEUMHbtnFoPspYab7QJD9_7OeU39gwNA1VA4gjkmlsul5Ex-dl5Ct6zJMy4-VbFHab6VOlwGqI3Jcm9AeiePjIyEbMWX/s320/3-710688.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5589944650071514306" /></a></p><p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgfmZwClq1IFciw5pCxHejMMsAPT74Rs41znbzGJniMHs5qIDtwlFvhh6K8_NKvKAr1_Twf1Ghyphenhyphenkiyx_iSjm1b1e6_Mi8qYRPV8PicmgD9MGZuXznUhAlpnoW8Dmd7VOBdYoeTLPwn5JD71/s1600/4-711478.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgfmZwClq1IFciw5pCxHejMMsAPT74Rs41znbzGJniMHs5qIDtwlFvhh6K8_NKvKAr1_Twf1Ghyphenhyphenkiyx_iSjm1b1e6_Mi8qYRPV8PicmgD9MGZuXznUhAlpnoW8Dmd7VOBdYoeTLPwn5JD71/s320/4-711478.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5589944654073380802" /></a></p><p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgryuFbLAjI2uyaig79CulDLKUFllfM6V4gRIPnDfS5DJ5yHFseijl3hXLqRVhbKV0jst8lg5H8vjhnP8otkUZ9yHnDSgckLfzx0rZn7YVDUZkn6G6DozVfHSWQHjQRFSGv2Un7FLGHRsGO/s1600/5-712244.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgryuFbLAjI2uyaig79CulDLKUFllfM6V4gRIPnDfS5DJ5yHFseijl3hXLqRVhbKV0jst8lg5H8vjhnP8otkUZ9yHnDSgckLfzx0rZn7YVDUZkn6G6DozVfHSWQHjQRFSGv2Un7FLGHRsGO/s320/5-712244.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5589944658093900130" /></a></p>U.S.-Asia Law Institute<br>110 West 3rd Street<br>Room 218, New York<br>New York 10012<br>Telephone: (212) 992-8837<br>Facsimile: (212) 995-3664<br>Email: <a href="mailto:usasialaw@nyu.edu">usasialaw@nyu.edu</a><p>Jerome A. Cohen<br>Professor Frank Upham<p>31 March 2011<p>Dear Professors,<p>I have had long-standing problems with human rights violations at<br>National Cheng Kung University in Tainan, Taiwan.<p>In March 1999 I was illegally dismissed as Associate Professor at that<br>university. I was not even informed of accusations against me until<br>after the dismissal hearing, of which I was similarly uninformed.<p>When original accusations were contested by the NCKU Teachers Union, a<br>secret letter from a student was then circulated at so-called<br>oversight committees to insure my dismissal. (The chair refused to<br>inform me of the contents of the letter, which I discovered only when<br>I took the student to court several years later.)<p>The dismissal was canceled in December, 1999 but the university lawyer<br>argued that a foreign teacher was not protected by the Teachers Law,<br>which prevented dismissal except for misconduct. The courts and the<br>Ministry of Education rejected this claim later, but the lawyer's<br>claim undermined the legal right to benefit from a favorable appeal<br>ruling. Thus the appeal was a legal sham, presumably a dilatory tactic<br>to insure my visa would expire.<p>Under US law at least such actions would violate the principle of<br>estoppel. But from what I understand that principle does not exist in<br>Taiwan.<p>After numerous hearings that obstinately repeated discredited<br>accusations, I gave up expecting justice at the university and<br>appealed to the Ministry of Education in Taipei, which ruled in my<br>favor on 8 January 2001. However, Kao Chiang, the university<br>president, refused to honor that appeal for nearly two and a half<br>years, until May 2003. Instead the university filed a lawsuit,<br>claiming foreigners had no right to appeal, despite the fact the<br>university held numerous appeal hearings and attended the one in<br>Taipei, another violation of the estoppel principle.<p>In the meantime two university officials tried to extort my<br>resignation from the university, at half pay, or threatened to delay<br>the case indefinitely in the courts.<p>Even when the university finally reinstated me in May, 2003 it held<br>further hearings and imposed penalties, despite the Ministry ruling.<br>Those were also overturned by the Ministry of Education.<p>University officials were repeatedly warned by members of the Teachers<br>Union and Ministry of Education officials that their actions were<br>illegal (see attachments) but persisted in their misconduct. Yet apart<br>from retroactive salary, I received no compensation nor was the<br>university required to pay punitive damages. In addition, the<br>university has never apologized.<p>Court rulings were puzzling (see attached). The court imposed no<br>damages on the university nor even awarded me compensation for travel<br>expenses incurred repeatedly renewing my visa. The court argued there<br>was no need for me to have stayed in Taiwan to fight the case!<p>How can an appellant contest a case without being present to do so?<br>The university could have insisted on my presence at a meeting,<br>forcing my return, delayed the meeting, and so on in a cycle of<br>attrition that would both discourage and impoverish me. Besides, in<br>another case a Taiwan judge awarded child custody to a Taiwanese<br>mother on the basis the American father did not remain in Taiwan,<br>suggesting he had no paternal interest in the child! "Heads I win,<br>tails you lose."<p>Review committee members and the student who wrote the secret letter<br>were similarly found not liable for libel on the basis their false<br>accusations did not circulate outside the university. But all libel<br>statutes I know state an action constitutes libel if a single third<br>party hears a false accusation.<p>What can be done with this case? The Ministry of Education, despite<br>its ten warning letters to the university president (see attached) not<br>only did not punish him but approved him for another three-year term<br>as president. The Control Yuan has done nothing. The three major<br>English-language newspapers never publish my letters about the case,<br>despite many editorials about human rights violations in Mainland<br>China.<p>Taiwan has recently endorsed international human rights charters,<br>which insure remedy in human rights cases. But the way this case has<br>been handled at Ministry and judicial levels suggests human rights is<br>a nebulous concept here.<p>I'm concerned what my legal options are, not only in Taiwan but in<br>America, since I am an American citizen. National Cheng Kung<br>University has numerous academic exchanges with reputable US<br>universities. Are there US laws or university bylaws that prohibit<br>academic exchanges with a university that has a documented record of<br>human rights abuses? Are there media or human rights groups willing to<br>expose this case in the US, since those options are virtually<br>nonexistent in Taiwan? Presumably Taiwan's media and government are<br>more concerned with the rights of a Taiwan taekowondo athlete than<br>with those of an American professor.<p>I am not merely fighting an individual case, but I hope to insure<br>proper treatment of American faculty in the future. Thank you for<br>whatever advice you give.<p>Sincerely,<p>Richard de Canio<br>Tainan, Taiwan<br>(06) 237 8626Human Rights at a Taiwan Universityhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11976319611467243332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5260997520127206909.post-9313680016923105292011-03-24T01:20:00.001-07:002011-03-24T01:20:17.867-07:00Re: The case at National Cheng Kung University<p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi1xaFX9hwunPhb58RfSra9gOm-Qnj6Qzn6wvh02YCAQi7bTTJYCH490Y8IrChLfsZvvtkQHTMvZb-Jcc1mJBJvU7CAmKssrdSj9RhVhV1pZGUpdscEte002SOd3_WKg8dDMQG2BGVycH62/s1600/1-717868.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi1xaFX9hwunPhb58RfSra9gOm-Qnj6Qzn6wvh02YCAQi7bTTJYCH490Y8IrChLfsZvvtkQHTMvZb-Jcc1mJBJvU7CAmKssrdSj9RhVhV1pZGUpdscEte002SOd3_WKg8dDMQG2BGVycH62/s320/1-717868.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5587558400431501170" /></a></p><p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj1y5p6LOGC9Yjz3jWnPtfrEcP49UjwnMDI90sXc4upj60s0aD2dBNDcyJB54UnNi-V654ibZutCIQ6hNRqH8_uwME5AmcGt8v2m3Irjohh_YpUrG04TM3UWB3GYs6Cw-6gveJWhNMovy2B/s1600/2-719744.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj1y5p6LOGC9Yjz3jWnPtfrEcP49UjwnMDI90sXc4upj60s0aD2dBNDcyJB54UnNi-V654ibZutCIQ6hNRqH8_uwME5AmcGt8v2m3Irjohh_YpUrG04TM3UWB3GYs6Cw-6gveJWhNMovy2B/s320/2-719744.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5587558402191296786" /></a></p><p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgspfQ1tSs3CJPCZObhuUeAyvnotQXkCqnxwTTZNvDadbojoPHu5uIq0qqTo6o9EtQE9VIDSvbtVC8FLbxm0N27goF-yH7kgyHAKf7Ub1Re9VNY9MTxYlk4-qH4OyoRyVAeQ0FsRzH5bu4-/s1600/3-721024.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgspfQ1tSs3CJPCZObhuUeAyvnotQXkCqnxwTTZNvDadbojoPHu5uIq0qqTo6o9EtQE9VIDSvbtVC8FLbxm0N27goF-yH7kgyHAKf7Ub1Re9VNY9MTxYlk4-qH4OyoRyVAeQ0FsRzH5bu4-/s320/3-721024.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5587558412409585042" /></a></p><p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEga3mwqCQEDBbGfjHwkLD3FFjxFpLNq-CNgPVtOVC9hKIaK0AETolCVlUhmmYF6xoydWV4NiVbmQ2vDYFmFHwF24k-mj2WgOM9fzrZLtvIAk6cwNJLbMbTLdN0tgr6SH9FGgcBs58NhA53U/s1600/4-722777.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEga3mwqCQEDBbGfjHwkLD3FFjxFpLNq-CNgPVtOVC9hKIaK0AETolCVlUhmmYF6xoydWV4NiVbmQ2vDYFmFHwF24k-mj2WgOM9fzrZLtvIAk6cwNJLbMbTLdN0tgr6SH9FGgcBs58NhA53U/s320/4-722777.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5587558414188507858" /></a></p><p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEicaEh84jUx5gNRZmaoYQE_K1QIqHbj6r_j6Qn2OWrhfGSjmH_JadxuPcVOPMeidm3f9-kNjR90SMdMqB1QXV1cAlLHyZcSXrEjzUTskTfrw9FbKzIUtM6ejyp5rs9uNUm9gIB6aH3edkP9/s1600/5-723610.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEicaEh84jUx5gNRZmaoYQE_K1QIqHbj6r_j6Qn2OWrhfGSjmH_JadxuPcVOPMeidm3f9-kNjR90SMdMqB1QXV1cAlLHyZcSXrEjzUTskTfrw9FbKzIUtM6ejyp5rs9uNUm9gIB6aH3edkP9/s320/5-723610.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5587558422543647746" /></a></p>MEGAN LU<br>Legal Aid Foundation<p>24 March 2011<p>Dear Ms. Lu,<p>Nice meeting you this afternoon. I am sending documents that may help,<br>assuming you have not received them in hard copy.<p>I would like to clear up one matter we briefly touched upon this<br>afternoon, namely the difference between American and Taiwan law. Of<br>course there will always be differences; there are differences between<br>American state laws too (some have capital punishment, some don't;<br>some give harsher sentences for the same crimes, etc.); but there are<br>legal guidelines too! I know of no US state or foreign country that<br>would not prosecute child abuse, for example; and federal law prevents<br>wide disparity in sentencing. All countries have libel laws, statutes<br>against bodily harm, sexual offenses, etc.<p>My criticism does not concern a difference or mild disparity of<br>rulings between nations. I don't expect the large punitive damages one<br>is used to in American law; but when the university is not ordered to<br>pay any damages, then that's an issue. It undermines confidence is<br>legal channels in Taiwan.<p>I feel judges in Taiwan do not strictly apply laws in their rulings,<br>as can be seen in other cases. A person kisses a stranger on the<br>street and it's ruled not a sexual act because the kiss lasted only a<br>few seconds. A person takes photographs of a woman in a changing room<br>and that's ruled not a sexual offense because it was in a public<br>place. One judge ruled a child should have resisted sexual advances,<br>etc.<p>Every lawyer knows that democracy is won or lost in thousands of court<br>cases daily. That's why lawyers fight so hard for defendants who don't<br>seem to deserve it. Why defend a person who killed three babies, even<br>when he admits to doing so? The answer is the lawyer isn't fighting<br>for that criminal so much as fighting for principles of law, which are<br>won or lost in courtrooms daily.<p>I wish people in Taiwan would see my case in that perspective. A<br>society is risking social chaos if it allows officials to do what they<br>did to me without punishment;. A society undermines the law if it<br>allows a student to accuse a teacher of failing her eight years<br>before, without proof, and with evidence clearly showing she was<br>lying.<p>Certainly one of the purposes of legal redress is to serve as a safety<br>valve, to prevent injured parties from taking the law into their own<br>hands. Without confidence in fair judicial rulings, a father would<br>kill the man who raped his child. Three strong men would beat a person<br>who owed one of them money and never repaid it. A person whose house<br>was burned down by another would burn down that person's house too,<br>possibly killing innocent people.<p>Therefore the average citizen must have trust in judicial rulings. I<br>can honestly say I don't trust judicial rulings in Taiwan. My case<br>speaks for itself. But it doesn't speak only for me; it speaks (or<br>should speak) for all citizens.<p>I suppose some people in Taiwan think what happened to a foreigner<br>cannot happen to them. First, that's a selfish way of thinking.<br>Second, it's not even true, like I argued above; because principles of<br>law are eroded or firmly established in every case brought before the<br>law. That's what we know as "common law" and "case law" and "case<br>precedent."<p>So those who fight for a case today on behalf of someone else will<br>insure justice for themselves or their family in the future. The same<br>judge who ruled that a student who wrote a secret letter against me<br>did nothing wrong can rule, next year, against a Taiwanese, in a<br>similar type of case.<p>So democracy is a job of work. I'm fond of the saying, "Democracy is<br>not something you have, it's something you do."<p>How true. Democracy is "done" every day, in court rooms, at school<br>meetings, among parents who complain there's no stop light on the<br>school corner, or that a child was bullied in school, and in similar<br>cases.<p>It's not only selfish, but short-sighted, for my colleagues to think<br>my illegal dismissal only concerns me; like it's short-sighted to<br>ignore discrimination based on race if one belongs to a "favored"<br>race; because tomorrow the same company will discriminate based on<br>religion or based on gender or based on who you know. That's how legal<br>rights are daily eroded and lost.<p>Consider the erosion of legal principles in my case. A secret letter<br>was circulated by high officials at a high-ranked university. Neither<br>the student nor officials were punished. The student is now teaching<br>part-time at the university; faculty who defended her are now<br>department chair and Dean of Liberal Arts. A president who refused to<br>enforce a legal Ministry ruling was not only never punished but<br>approved for another three-year term as president! Yet these officials<br>control the minds of the next generation of citizens in Taiwan! What<br>does that say about the future of Taiwan?<p>You told me you knew of the principle of estoppel; that one cannot<br>contradict a claim previously made or assumed in court. Yet the<br>university lawyer, Wang Cheng-bin, held appeal hearings at the<br>university then said I had no right to appeal, after I won the case.<br>Instead of dismissing the lawyer's case the court accepted it and I<br>won only after months of testimony.<p>But a court should be a forum based on legal principles, not a place<br>where people argue out of both sides of their mouth at the same time.<br>I can't fire someone for being drunk and when I lose the case claim I<br>fired him for being late!<p>Not only wasn't this lawyer punished but, from what I've been told,<br>he's treated with respect in court! I am certain he would have been<br>disciplined or even dismissed by an American Bar Association.<p>In sum, I hope the Legal Aid Foundation sees the wider legal<br>principles involved in my case: equality under the law; the right to<br>remedy, including compensation and apology; penalties as a deterrent<br>factor, which encourage lawful conduct in the future; fair judicial<br>rulings, which discourage personal vengeance or people taking the law<br>into their own hands; the need to treat foreign litigants fairly,<br>which encourages cultural and economic exchanges between countries<br>(capital investment, etc.). In the long run, every society benefits<br>from the best laws and the best judicial rulings.<p>Sincerely,<p>Richard de Canio<br>(06) 237 8626Human Rights at a Taiwan Universityhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11976319611467243332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5260997520127206909.post-25811841908382770502011-03-21T19:57:00.000-07:002011-03-21T19:58:00.609-07:00Our meeting on Thursday morning at 8:45 a.m.LEGAL AID FOR FOREIGNERS<br>Tainan, Taiwan<p>Dear Iris,<p>Professor Ray Dah-ton, who has participated in this case from the<br>beginning, and has attended almost all the court hearings, summed up<br>and criticized the court's ruling in several of these cases, attached<br>here in pdf format. Professor Ray has all the legal documents and I'm<br>sure he can send them upon request, or he can bring them with him if<br>he is not busy on Thursday morning, the time of my scheduled<br>appointment at the Legal Aid Foundation.<p>I will ask him if he can appear at the new scheduled time on Thursday<br>morning, 24 March, at 8:45 a.m. In the meantime, I think he will be<br>available in his office after noon today to address questions by<br>telephone.<p>Ahead of our meeting, I just wish to say I am deeply disappointed with<br>legal remedy in Taiwan. It's worse than having no legal channels at<br>all, because it's disheartening to go through the motions of legal<br>remedy (court depositions, etc.), not to mention the cost of legal<br>remedy, when the rulings don't seem to address the issues and facts of<br>the case.<p>Sincerely,<p>Richard de Canio.<br>(06) 237 8626<p>Contact: Ray Dah-ton (06) 2757575-62831Human Rights at a Taiwan Universityhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11976319611467243332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5260997520127206909.post-59414861383742859532011-03-21T02:16:00.001-07:002011-03-21T02:16:11.308-07:00Regarding Richard's appointment on Wednesday March 23, 3:30 p.m.<p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhvL4nwl64kKbnSS8zBACmTVKSH53oxMT144xR8ScdB40FLAu1BQAbKeoU8ChROIG_sTzVE5UgsPJvhiCy3yKl_SKLN5k0tiQgyNI-D2wthyphenhyphen_yc4KaYU_T1WpLmsCRUCfO2FKKKU7sf1FMY/s1600/1-771309.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhvL4nwl64kKbnSS8zBACmTVKSH53oxMT144xR8ScdB40FLAu1BQAbKeoU8ChROIG_sTzVE5UgsPJvhiCy3yKl_SKLN5k0tiQgyNI-D2wthyphenhyphen_yc4KaYU_T1WpLmsCRUCfO2FKKKU7sf1FMY/s320/1-771309.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5586459544623533954" /></a></p><p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiJvoQPjgLdwBO_sCKlYuancL3a9S841EjABVtVR076_VT0QgfPxJv5UH07Phb09_ylCL-xpuK9bjnaeub7W5C3v_1nmbLfJZciJ12nGm8fs-WknFVjmgnM90qUPqBKzkzUnbroyALtMVpw/s1600/2-773240.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiJvoQPjgLdwBO_sCKlYuancL3a9S841EjABVtVR076_VT0QgfPxJv5UH07Phb09_ylCL-xpuK9bjnaeub7W5C3v_1nmbLfJZciJ12nGm8fs-WknFVjmgnM90qUPqBKzkzUnbroyALtMVpw/s320/2-773240.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5586459553747271938" /></a></p><p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiCb1TMv6XnP78m0ctdQ1BjWA2MkbpGS-pFyhYRLptMfA34QrJKvqyQ0s8wV5lTVwywE6e93V8VXSnAbQhla1129HiDU9dvpMQjp9SRrpc99fbLu_IP2YIxPADs33Zk-WRkRhzUmm6JLmrh/s1600/3-774709.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiCb1TMv6XnP78m0ctdQ1BjWA2MkbpGS-pFyhYRLptMfA34QrJKvqyQ0s8wV5lTVwywE6e93V8VXSnAbQhla1129HiDU9dvpMQjp9SRrpc99fbLu_IP2YIxPADs33Zk-WRkRhzUmm6JLmrh/s320/3-774709.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5586459560497213266" /></a></p><p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEioSIWkdAC9n1zMuqCPlBiAlWwTn9ZWInMxY8Vo6j4UOo2b88I3QWrEEvI_Wfx8oh6AHencq6QIdF-ud0fogCIx8jvdn_ZCq_UGqEmyctnAjB0OTmXx0shg3e1hzR-GAP651wD4LhPFIp8l/s1600/4-776183.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEioSIWkdAC9n1zMuqCPlBiAlWwTn9ZWInMxY8Vo6j4UOo2b88I3QWrEEvI_Wfx8oh6AHencq6QIdF-ud0fogCIx8jvdn_ZCq_UGqEmyctnAjB0OTmXx0shg3e1hzR-GAP651wD4LhPFIp8l/s320/4-776183.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5586459564636546098" /></a></p><p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh_P_-vjV4BNSmhtaxzTDUDAeF_NVSsrqVBYZN0ZqTRsvOgV2NAROsAtyBSIwALMMs-5jMfCBkW6SBgxoBW6Ox5JrNq0XREISNJdOVlfKebDWf1VHgTiOuBLpyqN4_GFbKxtZuH5517AYR2/s1600/5-777826.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh_P_-vjV4BNSmhtaxzTDUDAeF_NVSsrqVBYZN0ZqTRsvOgV2NAROsAtyBSIwALMMs-5jMfCBkW6SBgxoBW6Ox5JrNq0XREISNJdOVlfKebDWf1VHgTiOuBLpyqN4_GFbKxtZuH5517AYR2/s320/5-777826.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5586459576022003122" /></a></p>LEGAL AID FOR FOREIGNERS<br>Tainan, Taiwan<br> <br>21 March 2011<br><br>Dear Iris,<br><br>We spoke over the phone around 4 p.m. on Monday. I asked for legal assistance. I have an appointment on Wednesday, March 23, at 3:30 p.m. but I thought I would sum up the issues here too.<br> <br>In June 1999 I was illegally dismissed from National Cheng Kung University. When the first accusations against me were challenged, a student letter was secretly circulated at hearings to insure my dismissal. The student, Chen An-chun ("Lily" Chen) accused me of failing her unfairly. She had no proof. She never contested her grade at the time but only eight years later in secret. (I saw the student's letter only after taking her to court a few years later.)<br> <br>The dismissal was canceled in December, 1999 but the university lawyer argued, against all legal principles, that a foreign teacher was not protected by the Teacher's Law, which prevented dismissal except for misconduct. The courts and the Ministry of Education rejected this claim later, but the lawyer's claim contradicted the legal right to benefit from a favorable appeal ruling. <br> <br>In US law the lawyer's action would have been prevented by the principle known as <i>estoppel</i>: that is, one party in a dispute cannot contradict a previous claim, either implicit or explicit. If the university held an appeal the university should be bound to honor an appeal that favors the appellant.<br> <br>After numerous tricky hearings I gave up expecting justice at the university and appealed to the Ministry of Education in Taipei, which ruled in my favor on 8 January 2001. However, Kao Chiang, university president, refused to honor that appeal for nearly two and a half years, until May 2003. Instead the university filed a lawsuit, claiming foreigners had no right to appeal, despite the fact the university held numerous appeal hearings and attended the one in Taipei, another violation of the <i>estoppel </i>principle. <br> <br>In the meantime two university officials invited me to a meeting with representatives of NCKU's Teachers Union. At that meeting the two officials tried to extort my resignation from the university, at half pay, and threatened to delay the case indefinitely in the courts unless I did so. I believe this would fall under the felony known as extortion under US law, which involves coercion (threats,force, blackmail, etc.).<br> <br>Even when the university finally reinstated me in May, 2003 it held further hearings and imposed penalties despite the Ministry ruling! Those were also overturned by the Ministry of Education.<br><br>The legal misconduct committed by university officials in this case should be considered an outrage if Taiwan is considered as a democracy. I am certain, for example, that the university lawyer would have been disbarred under principles of the US Bar Association. University officials would have been dismissed under ethical regulations and laws in the US. I am certain I would have been awarded considerable damages by a United States court for the university's willful and malicious misconduct, both to compensate me and to deter similar misconduct in the future.<br> <br>But apart from retroactive salary, I received no compensation nor was the university required to pay punitive damages. I should add university officials were repeatedly warned by members of the Teachers Union and Ministry of Education officials that what they were doing was illegal (see attachments) but persisted in their misconduct anyway. Such willful, defiant, and malicious misconduct usually insures high punitive damages in US courts as a deterrent. Not only have I been denied compensation but the university has refused to apologize. Democracy in Taiwan cannot mature if this kind of misconduct is tolerated, without penalty or accountability.<br> <br>Court rulings on this case are puzzling. The court never sanctioned university officials and instead of stopping the university's lawsuit contesting my rights under the Ministry of Education ruling (<i>estoppel</i>) actually heard the case, when it should have been dismissed on principle. <br> <br>Presumably, the legal system is based on human rights and ethical principles and is not just a forum for any kind of claim! I can't take someone to court for wearing a black suit on the claim it depresses me! US lawyers are fined for bringing unprincipled cases to court.<br> <br>Similarly, the court never punished the student, Chen An-chun, though I appealed at several levels. As I was told, the judge ruled it was "reasonable" the student believed she failed unfairly! But that's not why I took her to court! I took her to court not because she <i>believed </i>she failed unfairly but because she argued that as if it were a <i>fact</i>. The judge ignored "the preponderance of evidence," as it's known in US civil law: The student received three high passes from me apart from her failure. She accused me in secret. Her letter was solicited by a university official in order to be used in my dismissal. She accused me without proof. She accused me eight years after the class. Yet the judge found nothing wrong in her conduct!<br> <br>The judge also ruled that Lily's accusation was not libel since it was not circulated outside the university. But all libel laws I know of state that a false accusation is libel if just one other person, apart from the person being defamed, hears it. If I falsely accuse Bob of being a thief and only Bob hears it, it's not libel. But if John hears it too, it's libel. But the judge ruled against me!<br> <br>Finally the judge ruled against compensation on the basis that I did not have to stay in Taiwan to fight my illegal dismissal and therefore could not claim compensation for hotel costs, airplane fees, etc. when I renewed by visa every few months.<br> <br>How could I have fought my case by moving back to the United States? As soon as I moved back the university would have held a hearing and insisted on my presence. When I flew back to Taiwan the university would have found a reason to delay the hearing, or held numerous other hearings. It would have cost me even more money.<br> <br>Besides, another judge made a completely opposite ruling in a case of an American's attempt to gain custody of his child with a Taiwanese wife. Because the American returned to the United States in the meantime the judge ruled that proved he did not really love his child and awarded custody to the Taiwanese mother! In other words, "heads I win, tails you lose"! If I had returned to the United States the court might have ruled against me in the university case, because my return to the US proved I was not sincere about my attempt to fight my dismissal; or that I missed an appeal hearing and thus forfeited my appellant rights!<br> <br>Apparently judges in Taiwan can rule either way. Does it seem reasonable that an appellant should leave Taiwan while fighting an illegal dismissal at a Taiwan university? A democracy is established on numerous rulings such as these; that's why US lawyers fight so hard for principles of human rights in American courtrooms. <br> <br>That's why I can't let this case disappear. This is not just my issue; it concerns the future of Taiwan democracy, because democracy is established on thousands of daily rulings.<br><br>Besides, Taiwan citizens receive justice in the United States; moreover, rational judicial rulings discourage misconduct. I think an American citizen should receive justice (not merely legal rulings) in Taiwan. <br> <br>I therefore ask for your assistance. <br><br>My question is what can be done with this case? Taiwan has recently signed international human rights charters, which insure remedy in human rights cases. There is also the Control Yuan, the Ministry of Education and other civil remedies. Please advise me. <br> <br>Thank you.<br><br>Sincerely,<br><br>Richard de Canio<br>Tainan, Taiwan<br>(06) 237 8626<br><br> Human Rights at a Taiwan Universityhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11976319611467243332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5260997520127206909.post-34460974409277195352011-03-15T08:14:00.001-07:002011-03-15T08:14:30.596-07:00Unresolved human rights abuses at National Cheng Kung University in Tainan, Taiwan<p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgfg567RDLZCVPwaPGmNZwPd0RqcQIZijCSC2RhGDwTykxeivG0tiUB2nKJJJll18hqdIAvomTHw6nsujRNYDPolx2UN4jgKq_FpmsQDjtnb7dXQmNFRPnIjLwQJoeCFKYQ5wZHUSzh73nu/s1600/apache-770598.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgfg567RDLZCVPwaPGmNZwPd0RqcQIZijCSC2RhGDwTykxeivG0tiUB2nKJJJll18hqdIAvomTHw6nsujRNYDPolx2UN4jgKq_FpmsQDjtnb7dXQmNFRPnIjLwQJoeCFKYQ5wZHUSzh73nu/s320/apache-770598.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5584325374680262178" /></a></p><p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgHg-NC7_MF9qcojwXkzMZJ6ozjhn4Z5O-VlRpSVM1UzhKfQ8FdNJyo9jqcIz7OdXBOt8E3RcCw03PcoMd3eJPqzIbL_lUuY7vpf3UAOkAu8Bz7avWmpfO9pJIf4qVFB8Kp3ZVlMuuU-u3A/s1600/Internet-773064.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgHg-NC7_MF9qcojwXkzMZJ6ozjhn4Z5O-VlRpSVM1UzhKfQ8FdNJyo9jqcIz7OdXBOt8E3RcCw03PcoMd3eJPqzIbL_lUuY7vpf3UAOkAu8Bz7avWmpfO9pJIf4qVFB8Kp3ZVlMuuU-u3A/s320/Internet-773064.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5584325382839934338" /></a></p>Ministry of Education<br>Dr. Wu Ching-Ji,<br>Minister of Education<br>Taipei, Taiwan<br><br>cc:Dr. Hwung-Hweng Hwung<br>President<br>National Cheng Kung University<br>Tainan, Taiwan<br><br>Scholars at Risk<br>New York, N.Y.<br> <br>15 March 2011 <br><br>Dear Minister Wu,<br><br>National Cheng Kung University has a chronic history of human rights violations that began in 1999 with my illegal dismissal. University officials circulated a secret letter, invented accusations against me after other accusations were discredited, then canceled my dismissal on appeal but refused to honor its own ruling on the basis that foreigners were not protected by the Teachers Law, a claim rejected by the Ministry as well as the courts. <br> <br>When your Ministry ruled in my favor on 8 January 2001, the university refused to honor that ruling for nearly two and a half years, despite ten warning letters (attached). Instead it used tax-paid money to contest a legal appeal at which the university deposed and never contested until it lost. <br> <br>In the meantime, university officials tried to extort my resignation by threatening to delay the case in the courts indefinitely. After it reinstated me, the university contested my right to retroactive salary and held further hearings to penalize me. <br> <br>To the present day the university has not apologized, issued compensation, or punished faculty and students in their conspiracy to obstruct justice and deny an American professor his rights.<br><br>Several presidents, including the present one, have failed to resolve this case according to principles guaranteed by international law. One president, Kao Chiang, defied the Ministry for years, as if NCKU were a rogue institution instead of a top-ranked university in Taiwan. <br> <br>Academic exchanges cannot and should not be maintained except on a basis of mutual respect. There are also principles called "human rights," which Taiwan has recently endorsed as a guarantee of both law and appeal, if necessary, above the law, based on universal ideals rather than local prejudices.<br> <br>Only prejudice could explain why Kao Chiang's administration was extended by another three-year term even after he defied the Ministry of Education (see attachments)? The Universal Declaration of Human Rights insures officials will be punished despite official position, power, or nationality. <br> <br>Similarly, the Taiwan student who made secret accusations against me not only has never been punished but is teaching part-time at the university where she discredited me. An American professor is not without honor, except in Taiwan. Only nationalistic prejudice could explain why a Taiwan student was allowed to discredit a teacher without proof and eight years after a disputed grade.<br> <br>The Golden Rule is part of Western and Chinese moral codes, but apparently is only observed under the American justice system, where the student would have been discredited, not the teacher. That's called due process of law, which is no respecter of persons.<br> <br>The university's refusal to punish this student has impacted my life to the present, as, twelve years later, NCKU students still think I failed a student unfairly (see attached student Internet post, dated August 2010). Similarly, in a Wikipedia Edit dated 20 October 2010, it's claimed my illegal dismissal never occurred (see attachment)!<br> <br>Whether the writer is associated with NCKU is irrelevant. The university's refusal to formally close this case has fostered a revisionist history that exculpates the university, though NCKU officials repeated human rights violations defiantly and obstinately (see MOE attachment). <br> <br>Thus there can be no compromise on the issues of a formal apology, compensation, and punishment of the student. Apart from losses in time and money, compensation is an earnest of sincerity. If I sincerely apologize for breaking someone's window I will pay for it. If I don't, my apology is insincere since it ignores the harm caused.<br> <br>Recently an NCKU official drafted an "apology" that appealed to "the True, the Good, and the Beautiful." As if those could exist without human rights and a remedy that insures them. When Plato used those words he meant justice, not the denial of justice.<br> <br>A university that does not observe those principles must be considered a rogue institution, with no right to academic exchanges with American universities or universities that guarantee human rights. <br><br>This case will soon be in its thirteenth year. I regret to say if I don't receive an adequate reply to this petition by Thursday, I will, as a further step, circulate this letter to the student newspapers of universities with which NCKU has academic exchanges. Perhaps if American students expose this case it will force an open discussion of these issues on college campuses to insure a just resolution so far denied me in Taiwan. <br> <br>Sincerely,<br><br>Richard de Canio<br>formerly, Associate Professor<br>Department of Foreign Languages and Literature<br>National Cheng Kung University<br><a href="http://www.ringtonematcher.com/co/ringtonematcher/02/noc.asp?sid=LWOStop&artist=Judy%20Garland&song=The%20Trolley%20Song" style="color: red; font-size: 14px; font-family: Arial; font-weight: bold;" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"></a> Human Rights at a Taiwan Universityhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11976319611467243332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5260997520127206909.post-18615253940480884542011-03-10T23:24:00.001-08:002011-03-10T23:24:07.881-08:00Concerning human rights abuses at National Cheng Kung University that we discussed over the telephone this morning.<p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiFW4EDRCAIcB8xm2oDKQGhqgYRliWyV0lz6nmOtpMK9ZmrAPAtkJ_4oMQ6dVDxkwmowJu8R3ZC0Tba4b_bS-DYqfvcsyPfgEy51lrBMmNcEPSeKnYbBVIeMSfx4F6nrDXvrAMPkD9h_97V/s1600/Internet-747882.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiFW4EDRCAIcB8xm2oDKQGhqgYRliWyV0lz6nmOtpMK9ZmrAPAtkJ_4oMQ6dVDxkwmowJu8R3ZC0Tba4b_bS-DYqfvcsyPfgEy51lrBMmNcEPSeKnYbBVIeMSfx4F6nrDXvrAMPkD9h_97V/s320/Internet-747882.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5582719819106764386" /></a></p><p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjgXdzbU5u72VD_vEOyKnYXT3f-lLI2G_Qt6t_KVBVVwKVnI6g3OEw6cw1bozccMlRmVn0wU1SfWEAOzs2ofmTbIygvIEngeHG6UTqHv1lWquR2sB5S9H7wGbIlNEVuPkHm07ap_6x9b3i9/s1600/libertytimes-749563.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjgXdzbU5u72VD_vEOyKnYXT3f-lLI2G_Qt6t_KVBVVwKVnI6g3OEw6cw1bozccMlRmVn0wU1SfWEAOzs2ofmTbIygvIEngeHG6UTqHv1lWquR2sB5S9H7wGbIlNEVuPkHm07ap_6x9b3i9/s320/libertytimes-749563.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5582719820942872738" /></a></p><p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgQTztLzYs6DG8Ojblq8Z8ktmof9YNT7SJPB4owXIY6ml7AQpKW_EJ5agCsbuaN0krXhjseSRxScoRm9byMuONTLTkbKZq3h26Ita6-eZLnpwNaSgAlfdA_aam9hai1pMNsYXXJ_kRaE_zx/s1600/moeLetters10-751037.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgQTztLzYs6DG8Ojblq8Z8ktmof9YNT7SJPB4owXIY6ml7AQpKW_EJ5agCsbuaN0krXhjseSRxScoRm9byMuONTLTkbKZq3h26Ita6-eZLnpwNaSgAlfdA_aam9hai1pMNsYXXJ_kRaE_zx/s320/moeLetters10-751037.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5582719829637721074" /></a></p><p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiks4T4NDe0k_mUcE336qYvFHtMeh4g5J7qvi_18Qx32QBjQrz1t3lglELC91-GIcVI_aGPA7jeeFyW7XD1QUi4ahgSzfYPI6SNe9dZyBffm2M6DR9Hd6g6iUwS1XG2Y5GuuqkAHksslm6w/s1600/apache-752293.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiks4T4NDe0k_mUcE336qYvFHtMeh4g5J7qvi_18Qx32QBjQrz1t3lglELC91-GIcVI_aGPA7jeeFyW7XD1QUi4ahgSzfYPI6SNe9dZyBffm2M6DR9Hd6g6iUwS1XG2Y5GuuqkAHksslm6w/s320/apache-752293.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5582719835544292066" /></a></p><p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiF50Lfa-JfEVSA4A0uF8pGjuqyF2mhCQOKe7hbVKo6k82ECSKUhz-bFtz-m8XTY4NVbkVVvuL452SWce0ZkBISs-gBhmQ9zMMPyADzawWy3ZEn8FfxxKCTGDEvCqF3BCrjfftK8go9t8hl/s1600/4-753889.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiF50Lfa-JfEVSA4A0uF8pGjuqyF2mhCQOKe7hbVKo6k82ECSKUhz-bFtz-m8XTY4NVbkVVvuL452SWce0ZkBISs-gBhmQ9zMMPyADzawWy3ZEn8FfxxKCTGDEvCqF3BCrjfftK8go9t8hl/s320/4-753889.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5582719841768061186" /></a></p><p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiZKtg4Aav65xxe48fjBOovokiDesLh89qPYbaDWga_4hEh0EwxKCeV1UtT0hSUykbx9_U9slCbUVXb3wU0pJq9l7Ge9BbVAqKNsGX6PxagNqweFv36cxEO7zr2bKTiUG78Yjeq5f4Cys9b/s1600/5-755301.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiZKtg4Aav65xxe48fjBOovokiDesLh89qPYbaDWga_4hEh0EwxKCeV1UtT0hSUykbx9_U9slCbUVXb3wU0pJq9l7Ge9BbVAqKNsGX6PxagNqweFv36cxEO7zr2bKTiUG78Yjeq5f4Cys9b/s320/5-755301.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5582719849300263042" /></a></p><p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjRjI_3gXa_Q37b9eoNuTw4QYRexmnKfeF6G_VENiLIzsQLk-KYigYh2RSCYiuwiif1ET4PndjU6-63-O5lLi2DWsOwhf_OuUvOHdmQWiPoEBh28g5cAeyAzZcS2vsVYX0e_el_l038c-9c/s1600/1-756330.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjRjI_3gXa_Q37b9eoNuTw4QYRexmnKfeF6G_VENiLIzsQLk-KYigYh2RSCYiuwiif1ET4PndjU6-63-O5lLi2DWsOwhf_OuUvOHdmQWiPoEBh28g5cAeyAzZcS2vsVYX0e_el_l038c-9c/s320/1-756330.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5582719856470110642" /></a></p><p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiB_-Gh-1MxiHeE12mucBokkT0eFw05SC2d0mxNZ9IWCev_hsvjVfxEUM-E-9RoshbxWTGIqN42HBSTwArprzeNzs1XhClbipAoWWGT1RuEUHlVTAii1GJg4zH_zpNUvVY_8vMiE4Uz35yT/s1600/2-757984.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiB_-Gh-1MxiHeE12mucBokkT0eFw05SC2d0mxNZ9IWCev_hsvjVfxEUM-E-9RoshbxWTGIqN42HBSTwArprzeNzs1XhClbipAoWWGT1RuEUHlVTAii1GJg4zH_zpNUvVY_8vMiE4Uz35yT/s320/2-757984.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5582719860432084530" /></a></p><p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg-QSrt8w6R9IAJ0cw7sFc1l5D7R9XiSqt5SGNWIYQcT2MiQVcwQqP8h108kXoWwRIIjBwnk6V4ws9DhRMf4hy6fwpEDh3xowWlU9-jpVrB5WXwLTLqkJcE8PyoNnCOes4YvQ-dsPdd9FAC/s1600/3-759474.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg-QSrt8w6R9IAJ0cw7sFc1l5D7R9XiSqt5SGNWIYQcT2MiQVcwQqP8h108kXoWwRIIjBwnk6V4ws9DhRMf4hy6fwpEDh3xowWlU9-jpVrB5WXwLTLqkJcE8PyoNnCOes4YvQ-dsPdd9FAC/s320/3-759474.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5582719863456524322" /></a></p>Mr. David Wu<br>Ministry of Education<br>Taipei, Taiwan<br> <br>11 March 2011 <br><br>Dear Mr. Wu,<br><br>You asked to know the facts of my illegal dismissal at National Cheng Kung University in 1999. The case is well known and has appeared in the news but is still unresolved due either to defiant or incompetent officials at NCKU, including several former presidents, up to the current one, Hwung-Hweng Hwung. <br> <br>One former president, Kao Chiang, defied the Ministry of Education for years, without penalty. In fact, he was approved for a second three-year term even after he defied the Ministry. How can Taiwan's universities expect to maintain academic exchanges with American universities if Taiwan allows discrimination against American professors?<br> <br>In 1999 a secret accusatory letter was circulated at several review hearings to insure my dismissal when previous accusations were challenged for being improperly investigated.<br><br>After my dismissal was canceled in December 1999 the university denied reinstatement on the claim that "foreigners" were not protected by Taiwan's Teachers Law. Thus the dismissal case was returned to the department, now as a "hiring" case, contradicting the purpose of appeal. (This claim was rejected by both Taiwan's Ministry of Education and Taiwan's Courts.)<br> <br>After many bogus university hearings, which repeated the same unproved and defamatory accusations with the same results, I appealed to the Ministry of Education and won a ruling dated January 8, 2001. The university then claimed foreigners were not entitled to appeal, though it held numerous appeal hearings and attended the one in Taipei. Instead of obeying the law, which is what officials do in a democracy, the university filed suit to contest the Ministry ruling. <br> <br>When the court ruled against the university, it defied court and Ministry rulings, ten warning letters from the Ministry (attached), and two advisory letters from Scholars at Risk, a human rights group based in New York. <br> <br>Four years after my dismissal, and nearly two and a half years after the Ministry ruling, the university reinstated me, but held illegal hearings to deny me promotion and increments for seven years. That decision was also overturned by the Ministry of Education.<br> <br>To this day several university presidents have ignored my many petitions to resolve this case according to principles of law and international law to which Taiwan subscribes. <br><br>The student who wrote a secret malicious letter against me, which I saw only by court order years later, was never punished and is now teaching at our university after receiving her Master's and Doctorate at NCKU. However her graduate committees were made up almost entirely of the same professors who defended her for writing a secret letter against me. This calls into question the impartiality of NCKU's accreditation process, since I know of no professor in any democracy that would defend a student for secretly accusing a teacher, especially when it was solicited by one of the professors who defended her action.<br> <br>The officials who violated my rights by circulating unproved accusations and a secret letter were never punished. Committee members and chairs who chose to protect their colleagues instead of my rights, discrediting formal remedy at our university, were never held accountable. Apart from retroactive salary, I received no compensation for the interruption to my career and the costs, in time and money, fighting this case to the present day.<br> <br>The current president, Hwung-Hweng Hwung, is engaged in the same dismissive and delay tactics of his predecessors. But if Dr. Hwung doesn't take this case seriously I will pursue his dismissal in the courts and also argue for the termination of academic exchanges with American universities. Should a university that has no internal means to remedy its abuses be allowed to maintain academic exchanges with US universities governed by human rights principles, laws, and administrative remedy?<br><br>The discriminatory actions against a foreign professor would be called "racism" under most definitions of that word. When a young Taiwan student accuses her American professor of unfairly failing her eight years before, without proof, and in secret, and is favored by university officials over the professor himself, undermining principles of due process, proof, and equal rights under the law (including the right to challenge the accuser), that should be considered institutionalized racism at National Cheng Kung University; and on that basis I will argue under US laws that academic exchanges with NCKU should be terminated, in the same way that was done during apartheid in South Africa. <br> <br>National Cheng Kung University's stubborn refusal to issue a formal apology addressing the serious legal rights issues involved, make compensation, and insure penalties against those who conspired during the university's illegal dismissal action has added insult to injury. <br> <br>This is not only an issue of principle. The university's refusal to issue a formal apology has caused grievous harm to the present time. For example, a student wrote on the Internet just last year that most NCKU students heard of Lily Chen's accusations against me and favor her over me! (See attached.) <br> <br>An Edit for Wikipedia's NCKU entry, dated October 20, 2010, even denies my illegal dismissal ever happened and, contrary to court and Ministry rulings, claimed foreign teachers were not protected by the Teacher's Law. (See attached.)<br> <br>Thus the university's refusal to handle this case according to principles established in most democracies and under international laws Taiwan's president recently endorsed is adding insult to injury and makes it all the more necessary that this case be formally resolved. I will not accept the university's revisionist history of this case. History will know what happened, not what NCKU says happened. <br> <br>Dr. Hwung should understand that this case will be resolved according to principles shared by all democracies, including a formal apology, just compensation, and penalties against officials involved. There will be no compromise, and time is running out for Dr. Hwung as NCKU president. <br> <br>If the administration thinks it's going to play hide-and-seek with me the way past administrations did it is grievously mistaken. Essentially, I will use international human rights charters that Taiwan's president signed to insure Dr. Hwung's dismissal as NCKU president. I will also continue my petition to have NCKU's exchanges with American universities terminated on the basis of discriminatory acts against American professors. <br> <br>Sincerely,<br><br>Richard de Canio<br>formerly Associate Professor<br>Department of Foreign Languages and Literature<br>National Cheng Kung University<br>Tainan, Taiwan<br>(06) 237 8626<br> Human Rights at a Taiwan Universityhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11976319611467243332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5260997520127206909.post-70237470104173584812011-03-07T08:19:00.001-08:002011-03-07T08:19:47.807-08:00<p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiABBM_eINglEJ-1B9UK3Y-o_3ZmiqA5V5fCIAGkfVQkHyM7yRZUeawb6J5Wp0AYIhfKWnpFlfHszVUgL61qUjSY6XjSIkuVPzBmZ7UbTCChlOhfjMpnMXPNy_0EzJb1OJ2wMQNDPev7n1O/s1600/apache-787808.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiABBM_eINglEJ-1B9UK3Y-o_3ZmiqA5V5fCIAGkfVQkHyM7yRZUeawb6J5Wp0AYIhfKWnpFlfHszVUgL61qUjSY6XjSIkuVPzBmZ7UbTCChlOhfjMpnMXPNy_0EzJb1OJ2wMQNDPev7n1O/s320/apache-787808.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5581373517953789426" /></a></p> Dr. Hwung-Hweng Hwung<br>President<br>National Cheng Kung University<br>Tainan, Taiwan<br><br>Dear President Hwung,<br><br>If you read the attached printscreen of a document from the Edit History page of NCKU's Wikipedia entry, you will see why a formal resolution of my dismissal case is imperative. <br> <br>Whether the Wikipedia editor, APACHE776, is associated with National Cheng Kung University remains to be seen. If NCKU is sincere about its apology it should investigate this issue. <br><br>In the meantime, it's irrelevant. What matters is that a revisionist history of my 1999 dismissal, and the human rights violations that continued in the years following, was possible because National Cheng Kung University has delayed an apology for nearly thirteen years and the illegal actions have not been reasonably published or exposed. <br> <br>The Wikipedia Edit shows how imperative a formal apology is, as well as punitive and compensatory actions integrally related to an apology, whether by moral or legal standards; not only in themselves, but as an earnest, or token, of real administrative change in the university to prevent a repeat occurrence of what happened.<br> <br>Sincerely,<br><br>Richard de Canio<br>formerly, FLLD<br>NCKU<br> Human Rights at a Taiwan Universityhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11976319611467243332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5260997520127206909.post-76765366668713850242011-03-04T00:08:00.000-08:002011-03-04T00:09:00.913-08:00Updated Ministry of Education Documents to National Cheng Kung University concerning human rights violations<p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgfq9-Z_8GF5LJHOn00bpxEDKtNIsSY2Go1W0VHJjdtKirWstoE6TozK4Ztm4hzFHWAU2NVCM6rmDTuiSoasSfI4ApIefPx30KBpFaWgAsbjaewdjvpoRKCOImu4kMhMUtsurItB3-KJr4J/s1600/moeLetters10b-741019.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgfq9-Z_8GF5LJHOn00bpxEDKtNIsSY2Go1W0VHJjdtKirWstoE6TozK4Ztm4hzFHWAU2NVCM6rmDTuiSoasSfI4ApIefPx30KBpFaWgAsbjaewdjvpoRKCOImu4kMhMUtsurItB3-KJr4J/s320/moeLetters10b-741019.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5580133793497205762" /></a></p>March 4, 2011<br><br>Dear American Colleagues and Human Rights Officials,<br><br>I have just received from a representative of the Teachers Union of National Cheng Kung University (NCKU) a more complete copy of the warning letters sent by Taiwan's Ministry of Education to NCKU president, Kao Chiang over a period of nearly two and a half years warning the university to abide by a legal Ministry ruling. I have enclosed copies in both jpeg and pdf formats.<br> <br>There were actually <i>ten </i>letters, not <i>eight </i>as I had previously understood. Moreover, the new English-language translations, by a member of the university's Teachers Union, cover more of the Chinese-language text this time so as to give a stronger sense of the university's human rights violations for those who only read English.<br> <br>I'm sorry for sending a copy of these letters again, but, because of the obduracy and revisionist schemes of the university, either pretending this case never happened or marginalizing what happened as if it were of minimal importance (apparently Taiwan's taekwondo athlete's disqualification is of more importance here), I want to be sure, for the sake of Americans, indeed, of all foreign faculty, who follow me in Taiwan, that this case will not disappear and that there will be a permanent record of the history of human rights violations at National Cheng Kung University should this case never be resolved according to due process of law or international principles of law, as indeed seems to be the aim of the present administration as of the ones before.<br> <br>Sincerely,<br><br>Richard de Canio<br>formerly, Department of Foreign Languages and Literature<br>National Cheng Kung University<br>Tainan, Taiwan<br> Human Rights at a Taiwan Universityhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11976319611467243332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5260997520127206909.post-25680259443028323162011-03-03T05:08:00.001-08:002011-03-03T05:08:23.846-08:00Human Rights Issues at National Cheng Kung University<p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhpiq8CKG18z3P1BNZPrmz9-8iPqBVRtjdk-cQ-dyDK_7ENvZbwAhbqVDd0ifUi10FjhM6adp7G343MoPuLGUMgc0Nuvfh-2R3Pea9AkB3sEP-Tnlour7Wm2py5AJcRA_C8QeomR77nuGNb/s1600/moeLetters-703847.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhpiq8CKG18z3P1BNZPrmz9-8iPqBVRtjdk-cQ-dyDK_7ENvZbwAhbqVDd0ifUi10FjhM6adp7G343MoPuLGUMgc0Nuvfh-2R3Pea9AkB3sEP-Tnlour7Wm2py5AJcRA_C8QeomR77nuGNb/s320/moeLetters-703847.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5579839852386958386" /></a></p>cc: Dr. Hwung-Hweng Hwung<br>President<br>National Cheng Kung University<br>Tainan, Taiwan<br><br>cc: Taiwan Administrative and News channels, American Universities, Scholars at Risk, Chronicle of Higher Education<br>bcc: NCKU Faculty<br> <br>3 March 2011 <br><br>To the American Academic Community,<br><br>There is a long-standing unresolved human rights case at National Cheng Kung University that should be remedied if academic exchanges are to continue on the basis of mutual respect and principles of law. <br> <br>In 1999 I was illegally dismissed. A secret accusatory letter was circulated at several review hearings to insure my dismissal when previous accusations were challenged for not being properly investigated.<br><br>After my dismissal was canceled in December 1999 the university denied reinstatement on the claim that "foreigners" were not protected by Taiwan's Teachers Law, which insured employment except upon punitive dismissal. Thus the case was returned to the department, now as a "hiring" rather than a dismissal case, contradicting the purpose of appeal. (This claim was rejected by both Taiwan's Ministry of Education and Taiwan's Courts.)<br> <br>After numerous futile university hearings, I appealed to the Ministry of Education and won in a ruling dated January 8, 2001. The university then claimed foreigners were not entitled to appeal, though it held numerous appeal hearings and attended one in Taipei. The university instead filed suit to contest the Ministry ruling. <br> <br>When the court ruled against the university, it defied court and Ministry rulings, eight warning letters from the Ministry (attached), and two advisory letters from Scholars at Risk, a human rights group based in New York. <br> <br>Finally, four years after my dismissal, and nearly two and a half years after the Ministry ruling, the university reinstated me, but promptly held punitive hearings to deny me promotion and increments for seven years. That decision was similarly overturned by the Ministry of Education.<br> <br>To this day several university presidents have ignored my many petitions to resolve this case according to principles of international law to which Taiwan subscribes. <br><br>The student who wrote a secret malicious letter against me, which I saw only years later by court order, was never punished and is now teaching at our university. The officials who violated my rights by circulating unproved accusations and a secret letter were never punished. Committee members and chairs who chose to protect their colleagues instead of my rights, discrediting formal remedy at our university, were never held accountable. Apart from retroactive salary, I was never awarded due compensation for the interruption to my career and the financial costs in fighting this case to the present day.<br> <br>The faculty has been mainly silent, at best expressing private sympathy and hope that I win. Administrative officials are merely urged by their more enlightened colleagues to follow laws, not told to do so. This allows the university to ignore laws to violate human rights then invoke laws to argue against remedy, which is the stand the university is now taking. Should a university that has no internal protocol to remedy its abuses be allowed to maintain academic exchanges with universities governed by human rights principles, laws, and prompt administrative remedy?<br> <br>The English-language press, which almost daily publishes editorials about human rights issues in Mainland China, has ignored my letters, as have Taiwan's human rights groups. Ironically, only Scholars at Risk, thousands of miles away, responded to my petition for help, for which I remain grateful.<br> <br>I feel American academics and human rights groups should insure the rights, dignity, and careers of American professors in Taiwan. The recent taekwondo incident demonstrated how sensitive Taiwanese are to their rights and dignity, though they seem indifferent to those of an American professor in Taiwan. This is not a just basis on which to establish the moral legitimacy of a university or its right to maintain academic exchanges with American universities. <br> <br>Sincerely,<br><br>Richard de Canio<br>formerly Associate Professor<br>Department of Foreign Languages and Literature<br>National Cheng Kung University<br>Tainan, Taiwan<br> Human Rights at a Taiwan Universityhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11976319611467243332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5260997520127206909.post-32537780289359162132011-03-01T01:02:00.001-08:002011-03-01T01:02:08.571-08:00Forward of email from a faculty member and my reply<p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjdYt2vPBSr4sjLohpK3phIwBP7HYa7lJx6erqCMdhkSTkaXIhNHhrcML4u-hDSfc41yeNBu1wEYrXQpeUAZUyndvtwoqdpzFqWzi_w3ZyF3Pq7KmhKJY9-bl9-qFReed4emUMWne0Me6jq/s1600/AttachmentStudent1-728571.jpg"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjdYt2vPBSr4sjLohpK3phIwBP7HYa7lJx6erqCMdhkSTkaXIhNHhrcML4u-hDSfc41yeNBu1wEYrXQpeUAZUyndvtwoqdpzFqWzi_w3ZyF3Pq7KmhKJY9-bl9-qFReed4emUMWne0Me6jq/s320/AttachmentStudent1-728571.jpg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5579034225904160786" /></a></p><p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjSzAi2TEK6QrR70IqcjSscHJDp-EIaIDzyc8RByYY4M4raoYZF5GXZwtnW8cb_dR9aaASL4ta-tULp9XuX6rWHupz74rkkAuvdryO0BppfTHHeJO3HFqUKD2EE3T2rhn_0n0LWUeJ970Ju/s1600/attachment2-730396.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjSzAi2TEK6QrR70IqcjSscHJDp-EIaIDzyc8RByYY4M4raoYZF5GXZwtnW8cb_dR9aaASL4ta-tULp9XuX6rWHupz74rkkAuvdryO0BppfTHHeJO3HFqUKD2EE3T2rhn_0n0LWUeJ970Ju/s320/attachment2-730396.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5579034227110218018" /></a></p><p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhO90n9iKyAdKLLlvnnJQJHphCZ-250ixuNQu4hMibdR8zTmkVrzFT5SLAmQf305S81P5Cbuij0FJOPP2iXZUxdoExt3mF7j_mcNUQAd4LtZw9u6IlAU0JllwA6KZ5EincCkTErwPKurtpx/s1600/attachment3-732372.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhO90n9iKyAdKLLlvnnJQJHphCZ-250ixuNQu4hMibdR8zTmkVrzFT5SLAmQf305S81P5Cbuij0FJOPP2iXZUxdoExt3mF7j_mcNUQAd4LtZw9u6IlAU0JllwA6KZ5EincCkTErwPKurtpx/s320/attachment3-732372.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5579034238454342034" /></a></p><p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiOpLOSKeEaRxwimEP8ONPg-lR-fg4kdtYmfZj1LKMWS1JnqIaHkdp18-J9KEqC1GXNO8pUF6Rh0yAbyREfby8Llxe035bXRWUCyCV7hOzB-kSXPKupv3FPiHiB_5NTmMEB8AuwajeokY-e/s1600/Attachment+4-734599.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiOpLOSKeEaRxwimEP8ONPg-lR-fg4kdtYmfZj1LKMWS1JnqIaHkdp18-J9KEqC1GXNO8pUF6Rh0yAbyREfby8Llxe035bXRWUCyCV7hOzB-kSXPKupv3FPiHiB_5NTmMEB8AuwajeokY-e/s320/Attachment+4-734599.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5579034252476809458" /></a></p><div><font face="新細明體">Dear Dr. [De Canio]<br></font></div> <div> </div> <div><font face="新細明體">I received your previous mail, and the one before, and the even earlier one before that. I have been in this university for [omitted] years, and </font></div> <div><font face="新細明體">I also had received some other mails during the past few years. </font><font face="新細明體">So although I wouldn't say I've fully understood the very details, </font></div> <div><font face="新細明體">I am kind of </font><font face="新細明體">familiar with your case. </font><font face="新細明體">I also have seen the news on the Liberty News before, but I was surprised to know as you indicated in your 2/27 mail that "<b>In nearly twelve years that I've periodically emailed such letters, not a single faculty member has responded</b>." </font></div> <div><font face="新細明體">I feel bad about it, so I responed to you this time.</font></div> <div> </div> <div><font face="新細明體">I had not respond to your mail until today, so I have no right to blame anyone. People may have different kind of reasons or concerns, and some of these I think I can understand because it may apply to my case, including (1) busy (no kidding, very busy) with teaching and research and the pressure behind; (2) not knowing the details well enough so often hesitate to jump in; but (3) unfortunately also not having enough time to get to know the details; (4) not knowing how to help; and finally </font><font face="新細明體">but perhaps often unconciously (4) many Taiwanese intellectualities, such as university faculties, have been trained or intimidated or habitualized not to </font><font face="新細明體">against the organizational machine. <br><br>Today is the 228 Memorial Day, and I assume you have known the history of Taiwan. The White Terror is not </font><font face="新細明體">really over, it has become an invisible ghost rooted in countless Taiwanese for generations. Similar things happen everywhere and happen in the past, like </font><font face="新細明體">Germany before and during the World War II and the MacCarthyism in the US</font> <font face="新細明體">in the late 1940s to 1950s. It is sad when people behave this way, but often </font><font face="新細明體">it is hard for everyone to be brave and to act righteously. I disagree with this behavior and I don't like this behavior, and I think </font></div> <div><font face="新細明體">there must be other faculties </font><font face="新細明體">who are like me. YOU ARE SYMPATHIZED AND SUPPORTED.</font></div> <div> </div> <div><font face="新細明體">Twelve years are a long time already, but you already made this far. Wish you the strength and the persistence. You will get the justice.</font></div> <div> </div> <div><font face="新細明體">Best regards</font></div> <div> </div> <div><font face="新細明體">Sincerely yours<br>[name omitted]<br><br><br>Dear Professor [courtesy omission],<br><br>Needless to say I appreciate your well thought out email. I admit it's disappointing, but not unexpected, that so few faculty members are concerned about issues related to my case. Because these are <i>issues</i>, not just a <i>case</i>. A student shouldn't be allowed to discredit a teacher with impunity, especially in a culture that supposedly honors teachers. This impacts on all of us, assuming we have any self-respect. Are professors supposed to live in fear of such students in the future or of a similar collusion?<br> <br>Bear in mind this student was allowed to teach here part-time even after this case! (Her name is still on the official NCKU faculty list.) How is such a thing possible in a lawful society? She should have been punished, instead she's teaching and is presumably a role model for students, and implicitly, by her very presence at the university, is impugning me, as if to say she did nothing wrong or she would not be teaching here. But if she did nothing wrong, that means she did something right, namely accuse me of failing her unfairly. And what does that say to other students who may be tempted to gain advantage the same way? Or what does that say to students who declined to accuse me when asked (Lily's letter was solicited)? "Gee. I was a fool. I should have cooperated. I would have had a teaching job here." So you see, punitive actions not only punish wrongdoers but encourage people to continue doing right. If we saw that bank robbers got away with robbing banks many others would start robbing banks too and stake their claim in a profitable crime. That's why we have deterrent prison sentences. Where's the deterrent rulings to discourage similar actions at NCKU in the future? <br> <br>I should add that the teachers who defended Lily's accusation were on her graduate committees (M.A. and Ph.D), which also undermines the appearance of integrity in grading and accreditation. Of course if the student had proof I failed her unfairly or made her accusation legitimately, as was her right, at the time of the grade,and through proper channels, that would be a non issue. But in view of the circumstances under which she made her accusation, eight years late, in secret, with no proof, and presumably solicited to do so as a means to insure my dismissal, the presence of several of the signatories of that letter (attached) on her graduate committees should certainly be an issue. <br> <br>But there are endemic problems with our committees anyway, which repeatedly passed my dismissal even after the Ministry ruling warned them they were violating laws or legal rights. <br>Committee members shouldn't follow a university lawyer or president or chair like they were sheep. Not a single committee member stood up and asked, "Wait, how can we review this professor again if he won the appeal?" Not a single one to my knowledge protested. Instead their attitude seemed to be if "Daddy" (=chair, president, lawyer) tells us so it must be so. I've always been fond of a quote attributed to Will Rogers or Mark Twain, among others: "It ain't the things you don't know that causes all the trouble. It's the things you do know but that ain't so."<br> <br>Was there one committee member who protested when the university lawyer canceled my dismissal in December 1999 but then returned the case to the department? When an NCKU law professor learned my dismissal had been canceled he insisted I go to the personnel office to pick up my contract. He pointed to text in a law book to argue that since my dismissal was canceled I should pick up my contract. I told him of the duplicity of the university's action, which insisted on further review—this time to decide whether I would be rehired, not whether I would be fired. This was on the basis that foreigners were not protected by the Teachers Law. Then why go through an appeal at all? The appeal was obviously a charade. Where were the Taiwanese who benefit from laws in my country to stand up for me in <i>their</i> country, thus, apart from law, enforcing the principle of reciprocity that they were raised on? Why do those committee members demand equal rights for their children when they matriculate abroad? But when a Taiwanese is insulted that way there's a veritable feeding frenzy on the Internet and in the Taiwan press, which has pretty much ignored my case (not a single English-language newspaper has, to my knowledge, published anything about this case though they publish attacks on human rights violations in Mainland China almost daily). In view of the feeding frenzy during the taekwondo incident, you can imagine that Taiwanese would be hurling stones at the American Institute in Taiwan (AIT) if one of their children were treated with the disrespect I was. <br> <br>Not a single committee member protested at an appeal decision that undermined the very purpose of an appeal, namely to win, instead of starting a byzantine process of numerous hearings, reviews, appeals. I can't count the meetings convened n my case; but there was quite a number, paid for by taxpayers when the money should have been put to better use. Do taxpayers pay a university lawyer to preside over an appeal hearing only later to say the appellant had no right to appeal? Does the Taipei Bar Association allow this? Are committee members informed of laws, rights, regulations and the history of a case before they sit on a committee? Or do they simply allow a lawyer or chair to tell them what to do?<br> <br>Frankly I would like to see everyone involved in misconduct in this case dismissed from the university. That includes all committee members—at least in one committee where the vote was unanimously against me. In the other committees where there was at least one vote for me I suppose each member would now claim he or she was the one who voted for me. Therefore I believe in the future all committee members should write a brief report on what basis a decision was made. That would be confidential unless the judgment was appealed on reasonable grounds, in which case the vote would be revealed, at least to an empowered committee. A vote that was made on an illegitimate or uninformed basis would make the committee member liable under the law and to the civil courts. That means the voter could be dismissed and liable to monetary damages to the appellant. I promise you, dismissals such as happened to me would be a thing of the past. <br> <br>As it is, committee members are protected by anonymity except in the case of a unanimous vote. But that shouldn't protect the chairs of those committees who, in a democracy, are bound by law to uphold the law. Those chairs should be dismissed unless they can argue on what reasonable basis they chaired a committee in the face of illegal accusations or a legal Ministry ruling, or illegal actions on their own part. For example, Lee Chian-er circulated a secret letter against me. Is that legal in Taiwan society? Doesn't a person have the right to face his accuser? Isn't that built into democratic law? Lee Chung-hsiung similarly chaired a departmental "review" to dismiss me. Review? I was not informed of the meeting. I was not informed of accusations against me. The accusations were not properly investigated according to law. Then when those accusations failed Lily's secret letter was solicited, presumably as real proof! A student says she failed 8 years ago and that's real proof? What is this, the Dark Ages or the White Terror? There's only one problem: I'm not easily terrorized. "If God is for us, who can be against us?" (ROMANS 8:31). One either takes it or takes it on. Ive decided to take it on.<br> <br>I'm attaching a letter signed by 7 faculty members, most of them in positions of distinction. One is now dean, another chair, two others former chairs. <br><br>The letter is deeply insulting, impugning my integrity by accrediting the word of a student who had absolutely no proof for her claim, made it in secret, and eight years after the disputed grade. The letter was intended to discredit me but I would think any reasonable person would instead discredit the signatories (those who signed the letter). <br> <br>Three of them were Americans; one of them, Rufus Cook, is still around to assume responsibility for signing it. I would like to ask him if he thinks any professor at an American college would accredit Lily 's claim and, if not, why would he do so in Taiwan?<br> <br>Indeed, why would seven "reasonable" faculty members believe a student if she had no proof to her claim, made it in secret, and eight years after the class? Why would they believe one grade was unfair when I failed about one third of the students in the class and, moreover, gave this student three other reasonably high passes in two classes that same academic year? In addition, like I said in my last email, I wrote this student a letter (still in my possession) after hearing gossip about my grade and invited her to pick up her exam. She ignored the letter, claiming someone advised her to. Now why would a student who believed she failed unfairly refuse an invitation to pick up her exam, or delegate someone to do so? But better, why would I risk such an invitation unless (1) I had the exam and it justified my grade (disputing her claim I destroyed it or that she was unfairly graded), or (2) I did not have her exam, but knew for certain that Lily would not ask to pick it up for obvious reasons. <br> <br>These are fundamental issues that cannot be ignored. The signatories of that letter must be called to a committee hearing to be asked one basic question, namely on what "reasonable" basis would faculty members favor an unproved accusation against their own colleague? Now the principle of Anglo-American law is "what would a <i>reasonable </i>person do"? Would I believe a student who said she unfairly failed your class eight years before, especially if she had no exam to prove it? Of course not. Nor would any reasonable person, and juries are composed of reasonable people, at least while they sit under oath. <br> <br>(Attached are two letters, one from a normal student who failed but admitted it was her own problem; another from a grad student, who like other students and faculty at NCKU were pressured or solicited to accuse me but had the decency to apologize without equivocation, so I forgave him.)<br> <br>I add parenthetically that even if, for the sake of argument, the student produced the exam eight years later, what would that prove without comparing that exam to at least several others with high or low grades? That's why we have statutes of limitations even for the worst crimes, usually, I think, of 3 years (except murder which has none). Because the principle of law allows adequate defense, and how can a person defend himself after 3 years, much less 8? Memories fail, documents are lost, witnesses forget, die, or move away, etc. I would be suspicious of a student who complained of a grade 2 or 3 weeks later! "Why did you wait 3 weeks before contesting a grade? The teacher has other things on his mind now, your former classmates may be difficult to reach, they may have destroyed their exam sheets," etc. My classmates and I used to wait outside a professor's door to contest a grade <i>the next morning</i>! I'm not making this up. We used to have chats outside the office door waiting our turn and ask each other why we were disputing our grades. We never thought the teacher purposely graded low; we just thought we deserved better than we got and we contested the grade immediately. <br> <br>This student complained eight years later, in secret, and writes a malicious letter that one Chinese teacher said "made my hair stand on end" (I'm not making this up). Obviously she was not contesting a grade but trying to discredit me. Since the letter was solicited and dated right before my dismissal hearing, and since 7 colleagues supported her without a shred of proof, this would suggest collusion as a reasonable assumption (and remember, Anglo-American law is based on what the average reasonable person would think or do).<br> <br>Now not a single one of those signatories has been punished yet. Not one. In fact some were recently promoted to prestigious positions in the university. Raymond Lai is now Dean. Aaron Chiou is now Chair. A teacher named Liu Ge-Zen, who faxed a letter to the court to support Lily's claim though he could not possibly have seen her exam since Lily said I destroyed it, is now head of a language program, I believe. <br> <br>In other words, the Liberal Arts department is now represented by people who who discredited a colleague on no reasonable basis. One of them was my former student for whom I wrote a reference letter. Now you know why Shakespeare wrote <i>King Lear</i>: "How sharper than serpent's tooth it is to have a thankless child." <br> <br>The worst of it is I assume many of those involved in these letters thought I would never find out, since I would not stay in Taiwan long enough. So when I got my job back some of them came up with excuses. "I don't remember signing the letter," one said, asking me to vote for him! Another said, "All I meant was I knew Lily longer than I knew you." As if that's a reasonable basis to make judicial judgments anyway. What rational person would make a judicial judgment on how long they knew a person, especially when the other person was their own teacher?<br> <br>But this kind of byzantine discourse is typical here. It reminds me of talking to one official over the Lily matter. He kept whining, "Oh, I wish I knew who to believe!" What kind of whining lament is that? You give the presumption of truth (i.e. innocence) to the accused, not the accuser. Otherwise if A accused B of stealing money I would respond, "I wish I knew whom to believe!" But I wouldn't respond like that; I would respond, "If you have proof go to the police right now." If he said the theft happened 8 year ago I would respond, "You have a problem, then. You can't expect the police to believe you without proof." Anyway, who would believe an accusation of a failed grade 8 years later?<br> <br>Many of these people were accredited in advanced democracies abroad but they seem to forget everything they learned, including the hospitality and respect they received, when they return home. It reminds me of Aesop's fable of the cat who trains to be a gentleman but as soon as he sees a mouse he reverts back to his predatory instincts. As the saying goes, "You can take the man out of the country but you can't take the country out of the man."<br> <br>The consequences of their actions continue to this day. As I showed in a previous email, Lily's accusations are having an impact right to the present time. <br><br>First, though I might consider teaching part-time, because of my dubious relationship with this university I cannot rely on a quality reference letter from people in my department, certainly not without compromising myself and my case. Indeed, since I had many students in my Film class, I might be teaching part-time at NCKU. <br> <br>Second, several students recently told me all their classmates heard of Lily's accusation and, as you saw in one attachment (attached), they favored Lily's side rather than mine. <br><br>Third, while I cannot teach part-time at my university, the student who discredited me, instead of being dismissed for doing so, is now teaching part-time, according to the official NCKU web page, implicitly endorsing her secret letter against me, which implies her letter was justified. Can you see the problem here? Can you see why I must and will pursue this case until it's formally resolved according to principles of law?<br> <br>I should add that no one involved in this case has been punished. Lee Chian-er, who circulated a secret letter at an important committee, was never punished to my knowledge. Li Chung-hsiung, who chaired a department dismissal hearing without even notifying me or trying to prove so-called accusations against me was never punished. Ren Shyg-jong, who illegally dismissed me before the 1999 dismissal (it was overturned because Ren used spurious student evaluations) was never punished for that. One dean, I was told, forged official minutes to make it look like I was advised to be a better teacher at the hearing, presumably to help Ren save face when the dismissal was reversed. He was never punished. As for Kao Chiang, not only wasn't he punished for defying the Ministry of Education for nearly two and a half years but he was actually endorsed for a second term as university president afterwards. This is not tragedy any longer, it's farce. <br> <br>But it's ironic farce, because the longer this case goes unresolved the more it is exposed, such as one student's comments I recently attached. She made it clear next time those rumors occur she would send students to my blog, where of course they will read the facts, not the gossip. Had those involved in misconduct been punished immediately few would have heard of it or even cared. So the Wheel of Karma works in ironic ways and, to quote Shakespeare, "the whirligig of time exacts its revenges."<br> <br>Regarding your four points, (1) of course we're all busy at something. If nobody did anything on that basis nothing would ever get done. And I think Taiwanese owe it to other countries to "do democracy" the way other countries do, insuring a hospitable environment when you go to England or Australia or the US, etc. If only based on the principle of reciprocity, important in Chinese tradition, don't you think faculty here should insure our legal rights the way we do theirs?<br> <br>As for (2) and (3), what "details" are there? This case is transparent, unless one wishes to complicate matters, the way they used to complicate issues when a woman was raped, for example ("Did she wear lipstick? Was her skirt short? Did she wiggle when she walked?"). The rational answer is WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE? Either she was raped or she was not. My kind sir, all it takes is a minute or so to read a single MOE letter warning Kao Chiang to issue contracts to realize that the MOE was defied. All it takes is a few minutes to see the MOE ruling that my dismissal was canceled, or a few minutes to see that a student was allowed to submit a secret letter without proof eight years after a grade or that Lee Chain-er circulated that letter. <br> <br>Remember in law the phrase is "<i>reasonable </i>doubt" not any kind of doubt. And that doubt must be based on principles of law. I cannot reasonably doubt that a paraplegic killed someone just because ten senators claim so if one physician proves it's impossible for the person to walk up the stairs to kill someone. But the university played a game of numbers, thinking that if seven faculty members signed a letter against me that would be seven against one (actually eight if you include Lily). But the law is not a children's game of numbers but of principles. If seven people have no basis to make a claim then seven is as good as none under the law, even if those seven included Pope Benedict and the Dali Lama. That's what "due process" means. One official here once told me, in a matter not related to this case, "I wouldn't lie." I told him I didn't care if he would lie or not, all I cared about was getting a document before I took action. See the difference between rational behavior and irrational behavior?<br> <br>As for your final point, I refer you to this link to an article called "Silence of the Lambs," which covers the main issue you brought up: <a href="http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/front/archives/2009/06/13/2003446067" target="_blank">http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/front/archives/2009/06/13/2003446067</a><br> <br>One of my favorite sayings is "Democracy is not something you have, it's something you do." With all due respect, my colleagues have got to start committing themselves to democracy at this university or you will be the laughing stock of the world. I was actually told by a teacher in another college that my case was taught to freshmen officials in order to teach them what <i>not</i> to do in a dismissal action. Yet NCKU is presumably the second-ranked university in Taiwan. <br> <br>Moreover the greater the delay in resolving this case, the greater exposure it will have, and it will impact NCKU's reputation for years to come. As it is I have no doubt that this case will never disappear; that twenty years from now graduate students writing their theses or dissertations in law or political science will refer to this case. Several human rights groups here and in the US already have all the documents, including most of my letters. Many of those documents are circulating around the globe by now. And keep in mind, the heroes of today (those who colluded in my dismissal) will be the villains of tomorrow, just like in the 2-28 incident you referred to.. That's always the case in histories of human rights.The university's attempt at revisionism, apparent in their failure to apologize or admit wrongdoing and in the still current gossip about me, will never succeed, I guarantee that. <br> <br>Thanks again for your email. I'll conclude with another relevant quote, from Edmund Burke: "All it takes for the triumph of evil is for good men [and women] to do nothing."<br><br>In conclusion, even if NCKU faculty here don't care about "foreigners," they should at least care about the reputation of their university. Because I will continue to expose this case, and use channels of American law if available, until this case is completely resolved according to principles guaranteed under international human rights charters endorsed by Taiwan's own president. I am committed to to upholding my reputation and the reputation of American professors in Taiwan.We treat professors from Taiwan with dignity in America and I expect the same treatment for us in Taiwan. <br> <br>Sincerely,<br><br>Richard de Canio.<br> </font></div> Human Rights at a Taiwan Universityhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11976319611467243332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5260997520127206909.post-14815211821815126202011-02-27T07:05:00.001-08:002011-02-27T07:05:28.128-08:00In response to a sympathetic email concerning human rights issues at National Cheng Kung University<p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiL5MbxFQUjvamDVOQzuOexFga4U82DcilvZhpv7ilISKBomffByPGB2ULTNvkuRkEq_8a2HGeayjBj1uRSvS1n4-y3vgJW5tn-JOM-MotQjKDtq3NqxTqHoGxIKXIhlK9FIwAmz3Y5vzsO/s1600/libertytimes-728129.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiL5MbxFQUjvamDVOQzuOexFga4U82DcilvZhpv7ilISKBomffByPGB2ULTNvkuRkEq_8a2HGeayjBj1uRSvS1n4-y3vgJW5tn-JOM-MotQjKDtq3NqxTqHoGxIKXIhlK9FIwAmz3Y5vzsO/s320/libertytimes-728129.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5578385683952269090" /></a></p><p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhljbFE3YpO-rg7Bqte-n8XZPJZc1dPyTlFrjg_Ma0KsLbXlr0cRJ7kQ-OYns-N37bNCiSBxDnaIamY90OJrv1Ww4j3KpHBmq8D2ZOiVIKC_sOfGyqGn0R2wtfq1vnJtl6kFhDmZrPZy4oa/s1600/moeLetters-729904.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhljbFE3YpO-rg7Bqte-n8XZPJZc1dPyTlFrjg_Ma0KsLbXlr0cRJ7kQ-OYns-N37bNCiSBxDnaIamY90OJrv1Ww4j3KpHBmq8D2ZOiVIKC_sOfGyqGn0R2wtfq1vnJtl6kFhDmZrPZy4oa/s320/moeLetters-729904.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5578385690325968450" /></a></p><p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiRF_HfSI-cJB8OGpBoNK-YMGvrI4HduonwoP_pZI5Kb1CtNb_Z-ufIExVHkvJT3UVfGOGmguli3TT_uzT4PrbjduanbQcyg14177lNHfxuUZAzclla9CnS46-M9pCYXcZ-I6dpx2CEr2hZ/s1600/1-731060.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiRF_HfSI-cJB8OGpBoNK-YMGvrI4HduonwoP_pZI5Kb1CtNb_Z-ufIExVHkvJT3UVfGOGmguli3TT_uzT4PrbjduanbQcyg14177lNHfxuUZAzclla9CnS46-M9pCYXcZ-I6dpx2CEr2hZ/s320/1-731060.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5578385694756941138" /></a></p><p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEibbrUYRnTuDVkYC07BDVHpbU9T5j7TJZ3S1rPDdyus2zHgxedM0ctb9qOjUwZTZwUsWuDe55ijE19ROfaz5xCSI8mmy0ZPa6jCjGB0QZwmm3QrpIPTZX47qU_XgE0EEiRW1w_DGBckdneU/s1600/2-731984.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEibbrUYRnTuDVkYC07BDVHpbU9T5j7TJZ3S1rPDdyus2zHgxedM0ctb9qOjUwZTZwUsWuDe55ijE19ROfaz5xCSI8mmy0ZPa6jCjGB0QZwmm3QrpIPTZX47qU_XgE0EEiRW1w_DGBckdneU/s320/2-731984.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5578385699543625970" /></a></p><p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh2nxzZaS-mO4N2WHFl6PuWTwHDV2wrPi6zooKv_Hi-t8QpF-Osv3babkhl1V2g6jHzxqTFbQNPug66ZRXYp4-JS51HWoeWxdx7CpodwA8rbG10T-sS1odMhhpb0gCSv5qoRh3E1HcLaqRi/s1600/3-732851.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh2nxzZaS-mO4N2WHFl6PuWTwHDV2wrPi6zooKv_Hi-t8QpF-Osv3babkhl1V2g6jHzxqTFbQNPug66ZRXYp4-JS51HWoeWxdx7CpodwA8rbG10T-sS1odMhhpb0gCSv5qoRh3E1HcLaqRi/s320/3-732851.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5578385700126519762" /></a></p><p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjLWBwv0iK_fNuluR64LsbqICqfln_se70h-C-AjY3wPnrB1eILh-hPifCI5xWztVeIvmT3h2ttEAZs8f3O4CiDo5HWEtdBzYw0J7a04rY-SOvlm-AIO3pr32KHqWHTOXmkVJqsX6iE-Ax9/s1600/4-733795.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjLWBwv0iK_fNuluR64LsbqICqfln_se70h-C-AjY3wPnrB1eILh-hPifCI5xWztVeIvmT3h2ttEAZs8f3O4CiDo5HWEtdBzYw0J7a04rY-SOvlm-AIO3pr32KHqWHTOXmkVJqsX6iE-Ax9/s320/4-733795.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5578385704248184610" /></a></p><p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjSN303Owgol9dH4crqVm1z3WgjRIkhEXLUiJfn9qHA4RiVVoYg2E3WenjJEk4ah5ll_Pt9TgiugNwwvRSkg3O3WaMIE7ShmsaypnCJV9h6nuNTfrrU57uSHrZrmgNOPz7r0aiIVz3dGF8d/s1600/5-734599.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjSN303Owgol9dH4crqVm1z3WgjRIkhEXLUiJfn9qHA4RiVVoYg2E3WenjJEk4ah5ll_Pt9TgiugNwwvRSkg3O3WaMIE7ShmsaypnCJV9h6nuNTfrrU57uSHrZrmgNOPz7r0aiIVz3dGF8d/s320/5-734599.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5578385708227440354" /></a></p>Dear [name omitted],<br> <br> Thank you for your kind and sympathetic reply and your request for further details. Unfortunately you are an exception. Most of the faculty know of this case very well (see attachments). It started as an illegal dismissal by then chair, Li Chung-hsiung in March 1999. When the "evidence" (i.e. undocumented accusations; I was not even informed of the dismissal action until afterwards!) seemed insufficient a letter was solicited from a former student named Lily Chen (Chen An-chun, still teaching part-time here at FLLD, I think!) who claimed I failed her unfairly 8 years before. The letter was secret and I was allowed to read it only when I took the student to court several years later! (Brace yourself. There's more.)<br> <br> When I heard her rumor several years after my grade I wrote her a letter offering to find her exam in my office. She ignored my letter; then several years later wrote that secret letter, even though she received three high passes from me. (See attachment for details.)<br> <br> In December 1999 the university lawyer reversed my dismissal.But that was a tactical maneuver. I assume they wanted to delay as much as possible so I would lose my tourist visa extensions. Anyway, the lawyer now claimed teachers were not protected by the Teachers Law. So my case was returned to the department, but now as an employment issue not a dismissal issue. In effect this nullified the entire appeal process and my appellant rights while maintaining the semblance of appeal. Where in a democracy does a person win an appeal and gain nothing from it? <br> <br> By the way, the MOE and courts rejected the lawyer's claim and strongly affirmed that foreign teachers are protected by the Teachers Law. In fact an official from Taipei, early in this case, rhetorically asked me, "Since when does a democracy have two sets of laws for people?" Another Taipei official laughed when she heard of Lily's accusation and said, "That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. How can a student complain about a grade eight years later?" I told her, "I'm glad you have a sense of humor because the people at our university don't see the humor in it."<br> <br> Now the case is returned to the department for "more evidence." Instead of punishing the people who made false accusations against me, the "prestige" appeal or review committee asks, in effect, for more dirt, but better dirt. This is a democracy! <br> <br> I finally won on Ministry appeal, January 8, 2001. Now the lawyer claimed foreign faculty have no right to appeal! The lawyer presides over appeal hearings at NCKU then when he loses at MOE he says I have no right to appeal. I assume this lawyer is a member of the Taipei Bar Association. I wrote them several letters and made several phone calls to no effect so far as I know. Of course Taiwan may have different laws! In American law we have the principle of estoppel. That is, the judge will "stop" or disallow a claim that contradicts a previous claim either voiced or implied. This is related to "mend the hold." That is, someone can't go to court dismissing a person for being drunk and then change the argument when they see they're about to lose the case and say the person was really dismissed for being late. Court proceedings, in other words, are principled, based on principles. In American law a university can't implicitly accept the right to appeal by holding appeal hearings then claim later an appellant has no right to appeal, especially after the appellant wins the appeal! It's ridiculous.<br> <br> All this doesn't even take into account that a university with academic exchanges with US universities would even claim foreigners (i.e. in my case, Americans) have no right to appeal. This is what I will debate American exchange universities, in an American court if necessary. <br> <br> So the lawyer starts a court action trying to interdict or impede enforcement of the legal Ministry ruling, even though the lawyer attended those hearings in Taipei and never contested my right to appeal during those hearings. Presumably the university wanted to gamble that I would lose the appeal and therefore did not want to publicly claim foreigners had no right to appeal at that time if they could avoid it in a public forum. So they gambled but when they lost the appeal they had no choice. Too many officials were guilty of misconduct and they couldn't risk me returning to the university to demand appropriate penalties, compensation, etc. <br> <br> But the lawyer lost that case too. The courts said to issue retroactive contracts and enforce reinstatement. However NCKU's former president, Kao Chiang had other plans in defiance of both court and Ministry rulings. Despite the court rulings and despite the MOE Appeal Ruling and despite 8 warning letters issued by the MOE (see attached), Mr. Kao decided he, or at least the university administration, was a law unto itself; not in the sense intended by St. Paul in the New Testament, i.e. obeying a higher law, but in the sense of not obeying any law or ethical norms that most of us subscribe to: fair play, common sense, ethical principles, legal rulings, reciprocity, the Golden Rule (enunciated in both Christian and Confucian texts), etc. It's like a child knocking over the chess pieces when his opponent gains an advantage in the game. <br> <br> I should add that no NCKU president has acted on this case; each one delegates the case to another official, presumably on the surmise that no one can be held accountable. I'd like them to try that at an American university. In American law, as President Truman's motto put it, "the buck stops" at the head official no matter how many delegates he has under him.<br> <br> For example, the current president responded to the case when Dr. Lai was president, but now that Dr. Hwung is president he delegated the case to another official (out of respect I omit his name). So this is musical chairs, only NCKU is one of the highest-ranked universities in Taiwan, and it's not musical and it's not chairs, it's careers. The career of an American professor is at stake here; if the university learns this too late it's going to cost the university a plummet in its international ranking and, if American law is on my side, as I think it is, academic exchanges and the money and prestige that go with it. <br> <br> Finally, after nearly two and a half years and two letters from the New York-based human rights group, SCHOLARS AT RISK (to whom Mr. Kao wrote, "Don't worry: we're following laws" or something to that effect), Mr. Kao finally gave in and issued the contracts followed by automatic reinstatement. <br> <br> But officials had a new trick up their sleeve. (You see, people here don't like to lose. The problem is I don't like to lose either; and I've got the winning facts on my side.)<br> <br> Now, despite the fact that I won the appeal, they wanted to review me again. Perhaps I was just curious, or perhaps I was encouraged to do so by a respectable colleague, but I actually attended one of those hearings, then promptly walked out when I discovered they had no interest in the Ministry ruling. One committee member actually got irate over some of my comments to that effect. She should be grateful I did not wish to embarrass that respectable colleague I referred to above or I would have responded in a manner more appropriate to the occasion.<br> <br> In sum, ignoring the Ministry ruling, subsequent university committees ruled that I should be denied promotion and increments for six years. That too was overruled by the Ministry of Education. <br> <br> So you see our so-called prestige committees were overruled on every issue. One prestige committee, chaired by one Lee Chian-er, former dean and presidential hopeful, circulated that secret letter from Lily Chen and though I asked three times to learn what was in that letter he ignored me three times. One courageous woman, a member of the Teachers Union, defied the chair and summed up the contents of the letter. <br> <br> Anyway, I think that sums up the case. You say I should inform the rest of the faculty. But most of them know the case by now, as the attachments, which I've emailed the faculty previously, prove. A lot of our faculty matriculated and received accreditation at universities in America, England, and other established democracies where they were protected by principles of law and human rights. Some of them publish vocal attacks on Mainland China's poor human rights record. I contacted one such professor last year. He had published a strong attack on the lack of human rights in Mainland China so naturally I thought he would be sympathetic to the lack of human rights here. He never replied. <br> <br> As for the people who signed that letter defending Lily Chen's unproved accusations, one claimed not to remember signing it. Another claimed he only meant he knew Lily more than he knew me. Even if one accepts that inane defense, is that a principle of justice? Do I make judicial decisions based on how long I know someone or on the facts along with principles of law (i.e. no proof favors the accused not the accuser or every teacher would be liable to the same treatment, including the signatory of that letter)? But in this culture of relationships the signatory probably assumed, due to his relationships, such an insult could not happen to him. That's no way to govern a university; that's no way to live one's life; as he'll find out when he comes to the end of it, as Thoreau phrased it.<br> <br> Is there due process of law at NCKU? Are there principles of justice? Are there reputable review and appeal committees? I'll let you answer that question based on the facts rehearsed in this letter. <br> <br> I appreciate your personal response. In nearly twelve years that I've periodically emailed such letters, not a single faculty member has responded. Two, including yourself, responded this time. Perhaps that's progress. And I wouldn't dismiss two either, exponentially, which can quickly lead to 4, then 16, and 256, etc. It's the same math that established the Declaration of Independence.<br> <br> Cordially,<br> <br> Richard de Canio<br> Human Rights at a Taiwan Universityhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11976319611467243332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5260997520127206909.post-6124788403835203172011-02-25T00:21:00.000-08:002011-02-25T00:22:00.807-08:00Regarding Human Rights Abuses at National Cheng Kung UniversityDr. Hwung-Hweng Hwung<br>President<br>National Cheng Kung University<br>Tainan, Taiwan<br><br>bcc: Concerned parties<br><br>25 February 2011<br><br>Dear President Hwung,<br><br>On consideration of recent events, including a meeting with the new Secretary-General, I must say that I am dissatisfied with the dilatory handling of a case that has lasted twelve years and where the facts are transparent, including serious human rights violations and the university's stubbornly defiant refusal to be accountable for them.<br> <br>Please understand, this case is a serious violation of human rights. To pretend otherwise is not an option. The marginal way it's being handled only adds insult to injury. Forcing an American professor to continually petition for remedy is unacceptable.<br> <br>After nearly twelve years I should not have had to contact the new administration about this case. The new administration should have considered the case serious enough to have contacted me, especially since I contacted the current president last year when he was Secretary-General, who then assigns the current Secretary-General to discuss the case. Hoping the case disappears through such dilatory maneuvers is not the way a reputable academic institution should handle a human rights case of this magnitude. <br> <br>In sum, in 1999 I was illegally dismissed. The university circulated a secret malicious letter from a former student who had no proof whatsoever about a grade eight years before. This letter was solicited. It was circulated at all subsequent hearings, including appeal and review.<br> <br>The university stubbornly ignored urgent warnings by members of its Teachers Union that the entire dismissal process was illegal, since it was based on malicious and unproved accusations. A lawyer, presumably a member of Taiwan's Bar Association, presided over some of these hearings, despite conflict of interest. When the dismissal action is canceled on appeal in December 1999 the lawyer then returns the case back to the department, now as an employment, not a dismissal matter, on the basis that foreigners are not protected by the Teachers Law. To make matters worse, once I won the case in a Ministry of Education Appeal ruling dated 8 January 2001, the lawyer then argued that a foreigner I had no right to appeal.<br> <br>How can the same lawyer who presided over a university appeal then argue I had no right to appeal? Don't you see the duplicity here? I'm curious how Tainan citizens would react if we treated a Taiwan appellant the same way. <br> <br>Finally, the university refused to honor the Ministry ruling for nearly two and a half years. In the process of contesting my rights the university also insulted all American professors, indeed all foreign professors, by saying that we were not protected by the same rights as Taiwan citizens, even though Taiwan citizens expect to be protected by equal rights when they matriculate or teach at American universities or at other universities in democracies abroad. Moreover, even as they are outraged at the mere possibility of a slight to a Taiwan citizen, such as in the recent taekwondo incident where most of the country, including the media, was incensed by a perceived insult to a Taiwan citizen. Yet except for a few articles in Chinese newspapers, the Taiwan press and human rights groups have been silent about my case.<br> <br>I have deep respect for that superb Taiwan athlete, but as an American citizen I am outraged at the double standard shown compared to the university's response in my case, especially considering that those involved in violating my rights or retarding remedy for those abuses, including the current administration, are highly educated, many of them from universities in my own country.<br> <br>I hope you understand that, as in the case of the taekwondo incident, my case is not just about me. It's about respect accorded American citizens in Taiwan. As an American citizen it is my responsibility to insure fair treatment of American professors here. I cannot and will not compromise on the matter of a complete administrative resolution of this case, including my right to face the student who accused me (so far as I know she is still teaching part time at our university); my right to receive formal apologies from those who discredited me by their illegal and malicious actions; and compensatory and punitive administrative actions insured by human rights charters recently endorsed by Taiwan's president.<br> <br>The notion that an American professor must repeatedly, for twelve years, petition a university administration for such closure is unacceptable, especially for a university with numerous academic exchanges with American universities and other universities in established democracies.<br> <br>Please understand, one more time, that I am committed to a fair and full remedy in this case and I will continue to use all legal options guaranteed under Taiwan law, international human rights charters, and laws that govern academic exchanges of American universities with universities abroad.<br> <br>This is not an issue that requires dilatory review. The facts are plain and transparent. There is no dispute that a secret letter was circulated to insure my dismissal. There is no dispute the university refused to enforce a legal Ministry ruling for nearly two and a half years. There is no dispute the university claimed foreign faculty were not protected by the Teachers Law. There is no dispute the same lawyer who presided over university appeal hearings then claimed in court that foreign faculty had no right to appeal! The claim that foreigners had no right to appeal in itself should discredit the university. The fact that it was made after the university itself held appeal hearings only underscores the shameless duplicity of the university in its treatment of foreign, specifically American, faculty.<br> <br>I urge you once more to consider the gravity of the issues and my commitment to insure a full, fair, and formal resolution of them. The time for prudent delay should have been at the beginning of the illegal dismissal action in 1999, not now when remedy is urgent by international standards of rights and laws. It took sixteen days to pass my dismissal but nearly twelve years to deny remedy it. It seems to me reasonable that if the university can illegally dismiss someone in sixteen days it can, and should, legally remedy that action in the same amount of time.<br> <br><br>Sincerely,<br><br>Richard de Canio<br>Formerly Associate Professor<br>Department of Foreign Languages and Literature<br>National Cheng Kung University<br>Tainan, Taiwan.<br> Human Rights at a Taiwan Universityhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11976319611467243332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5260997520127206909.post-46744000338169256182011-01-02T07:30:00.001-08:002011-01-02T07:30:24.252-08:00Fwd: Regarding an academic issue<p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhU3z4FCeetsz8GTLD-JXE636yoJXCzpnyvuxSbd5SZ_HMez0iuKXSfreHTsaJaH5VU5EJyH9bmn0lZ21XUWNuMF8xekH6OIe5cchtB4lua9rJ0pzthcLc2GkHI1uYb2nmZop072sc_hRNl/s1600/moeLetters-724252.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhU3z4FCeetsz8GTLD-JXE636yoJXCzpnyvuxSbd5SZ_HMez0iuKXSfreHTsaJaH5VU5EJyH9bmn0lZ21XUWNuMF8xekH6OIe5cchtB4lua9rJ0pzthcLc2GkHI1uYb2nmZop072sc_hRNl/s320/moeLetters-724252.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5557611334356253714" /></a></p><p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgGXoJMXNsR2ZFnu0Q5QI1ohxWuf13n0vXc19xaxMNueZCiFnMpVNngruZelGb210SoNhfiGOGZEwaIC-jQnZ0HyXZbIgc9rR-Ab-462LET6GtihzyDMEgpCmkAG-EAw1ot9iPJLU8X9l0C/s1600/libertytimes-725314.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgGXoJMXNsR2ZFnu0Q5QI1ohxWuf13n0vXc19xaxMNueZCiFnMpVNngruZelGb210SoNhfiGOGZEwaIC-jQnZ0HyXZbIgc9rR-Ab-462LET6GtihzyDMEgpCmkAG-EAw1ot9iPJLU8X9l0C/s320/libertytimes-725314.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5557611342194694690" /></a></p><p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjEdHedn9__kJc06tHSrs_3FJLE3vth1JYZGX3s26efctSDHtDeQNAbSlfR47OS5YsxIFbrd0K6iG3OVyLUG61afuPBRyKF6ootOcZWDoZD6tR078nIJjGSHvg9XITnTCWikzZWUblNYLLz/s1600/1-726586.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjEdHedn9__kJc06tHSrs_3FJLE3vth1JYZGX3s26efctSDHtDeQNAbSlfR47OS5YsxIFbrd0K6iG3OVyLUG61afuPBRyKF6ootOcZWDoZD6tR078nIJjGSHvg9XITnTCWikzZWUblNYLLz/s320/1-726586.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5557611345155890162" /></a></p><p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgrZYFuoFjg1n-8Q-DhtGbsfe8om1kkDLkVLis1RTgkmzXmXlWVHKRTi-NF70NEUXNAQSOUC7YnTOM9zQ-u_8jC49s-ncj6nFBbPcIoJpdabxkneHYKcWvDPme3S3a39PLuZ8AmKxPBh1VU/s1600/2-728176.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgrZYFuoFjg1n-8Q-DhtGbsfe8om1kkDLkVLis1RTgkmzXmXlWVHKRTi-NF70NEUXNAQSOUC7YnTOM9zQ-u_8jC49s-ncj6nFBbPcIoJpdabxkneHYKcWvDPme3S3a39PLuZ8AmKxPBh1VU/s320/2-728176.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5557611354307109890" /></a></p><p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgKvJHhX9DLRHzZy-KfLJhdlQG0_ZL_cP9UXAmD7XzeqgvSJrsePMqta-s4vnZd_oT-gU5-ZKQcefm851x77oeC1_99hf0bZLlTBb8t5TPD8A_2UaEw-n_kUOTsJlNOezCiw1dN1SESm2x5/s1600/3-728977.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgKvJHhX9DLRHzZy-KfLJhdlQG0_ZL_cP9UXAmD7XzeqgvSJrsePMqta-s4vnZd_oT-gU5-ZKQcefm851x77oeC1_99hf0bZLlTBb8t5TPD8A_2UaEw-n_kUOTsJlNOezCiw1dN1SESm2x5/s320/3-728977.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5557611358252790386" /></a></p><p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEixvBJJjd2p2nmpK2D4sADbrB7LO5soCdkYrCxRBr22FPjsgulenZAJJGfIND6HlhvufcDY2x5i6ko0PVRtQ9vg1Nhyphenhyphenj0QIGjSkRagQK9Z5url9pJPtUuGfNqyJ_Q-nOAyKIpL6IYYkowRj/s1600/4-730285.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEixvBJJjd2p2nmpK2D4sADbrB7LO5soCdkYrCxRBr22FPjsgulenZAJJGfIND6HlhvufcDY2x5i6ko0PVRtQ9vg1Nhyphenhyphenj0QIGjSkRagQK9Z5url9pJPtUuGfNqyJ_Q-nOAyKIpL6IYYkowRj/s320/4-730285.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5557611361082887202" /></a></p><p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh_xVXwmZ7hgaZkwaf_RPC2oJJn0vadKydo97O_o7XlCjGZ84-SUNucf6ffutsLghq-LcE7f8qDRm_A5LPMKqV-SpxBKbOK5IMBh5BTU2YOoeYaAu3qsL-Y-8qqTLMM-MArdEbhGkSb2RXW/s1600/5-730853.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh_xVXwmZ7hgaZkwaf_RPC2oJJn0vadKydo97O_o7XlCjGZ84-SUNucf6ffutsLghq-LcE7f8qDRm_A5LPMKqV-SpxBKbOK5IMBh5BTU2YOoeYaAu3qsL-Y-8qqTLMM-MArdEbhGkSb2RXW/s320/5-730853.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5557611363687689666" /></a></p><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">---------- Forwarded message ----------<br>From: <b class="gmail_sendername">Richard John</b> <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:rdca25@gmail.com">rdca25@gmail.com</a>></span><br>Date: Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 11:28 PM<br> Subject: Regarding an academic issue<br>To: <a href="mailto:015130@mail.fju.edu.tw">015130@mail.fju.edu.tw</a><br><br><br>Father Daniel J. Bauer<br>Department of English Language and Literature<br>Fu Jen Catholic University<br> Hsin-Chuang, 242<br>Taiwan, R.O.C.<br><br>January 2, 2011<br><br>Dear Father Bauer,<br><br>I'm curious if you have any interest in a human rights issue at National Cheng Kung University, in Tainan, or if you have any useful advice pertaining to the matter.<br> <br>In 1999, a defamatory letter against me was secretly circulated to insure an illegal dismissal started in the Department of Foreign Languages. When that dismissal was canceled in December 1999, the university claimed foreign teachers were not protected by the Teachers Law and the dismissal case was now handled as an employment case! In other words, since I could not be legally fired, they now questioned whether I should be hired, which, apart from semantics, insured my dismissal anyway!<br> <br>When the Ministry of Education ruled against the university, the university filed a lawsuit to contest foreigners' right to appeal, though the university had held its own appeal hearings and attended those in Taipei! When it lost this case too, it appealed and then used the pending appeal as a tactic to delay reinstatement.<br> <br>After eight warning letters from the Ministry of Education (transcript attached), and two exploratory letters from Scholars at Risk, an international human rights group based in New York that asked why I was not reinstated if I won an appeal, the university finally complied with the Ministry ruling in May 2003, nearly two and a half years after the ruling (January 8, 2001).<br> <br>I find it curious that the mere appearance of disrespect to a Taiwanese taekwondo athlete could cause such an uproar here but a clearly documented case of disrespect to an American professor is tolerated. I wonder if NCKU president, Michael Ming-Chiao Lai, can explain the difference.<br> <br>To this day, despite repeated requests by me and colleagues, he has ignored my request for a formal apology, despite the fact that Taiwan has recently endorsed international human rights principles.<br><br>Neither the university nor university officials involved in this case have received penalties, which encourages future actions of this kind, not only against foreigners but even against Taiwanese citizens. <br> <br>No English-language newspaper, to my knowledge, has published any of my letters regarding this case, though at least two Chinese newspapers have exposed the case (see attachment for a recent item).<br><br>I know you write weekly comments for <i>The China Post</i>. I'm curious if you can explore this case in one of your columns or if you have any other advice to give me. I don't think it's right that a university, especially a high-ranked university, be allowed to ignore human rights principles like this. We treat Taiwan professors and students fairly in the United States, where they receive the full protection of American laws and rights. Even apart from laws and human rights, Taiwanese should show mutual respect to our teachers and students. That is a principle of both Confucian and Christian ethics.<br> <br>I would appreciate a response to this letter. Thank you. <br><br> <br>Sincerely,<br><br>Richard de Canio<br>Formerly Associate Professor<br> Department of Foreign Languages and Literature<br>National Cheng Kung University<br>Tainan, Taiwan<br>(06) 237 8626<br> </div><br> Human Rights at a Taiwan Universityhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11976319611467243332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5260997520127206909.post-6547538027087063412010-11-27T23:59:00.001-08:002010-11-27T23:59:33.536-08:00Re: A formal apology for human rights violations committed at National Cheng Kung University<big><big>Michael Ming-Chiao Lai<br>President<br>National Cheng Kung University<br>Tainan, Taiwan</big></big><br><br>November 28, 2010<br><br>Dear President Lai,<br><br>The recent ping pong edits on Wikipedia on the National Cheng Kung University (NCKU) page concerning my entry on Human Rights violations at National Cheng Kung University is, apart from other recognized reasons, a case in point of the necessity for NCKU to formally apologize for human rights violations the university committed at this university at least beginning in 1999 (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Cheng_Kung_University">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Cheng_Kung_University</a>). Remarkably, despite sourcing of Taiwan court and Ministry of Education formal decisions, linked to my Wikipedia entry on the NCKU page, as recently as today my sources were challenged and the human rights violations committed by NCKU officials were called "allegations" instead of facts.<br> <br>An allegation is, by definition, an accusation that has not yet been verified either empirically or juridically as a fact. Few things on our planet can be empirically verified as "facts," and some still question evolution or the authorship of Shakespeare's plays. But in a democracy we do agree on one thing: namely juridical decisions, at least pending appeal, in cases where appeal is still possible.<br> <br>Now my illegal dismissal was declared illegal by both Taiwan's Ministry of Education as well as by Taiwan's courts. This, in a democracy, is as much juridical closure as it's possible to get. To challenge even judicial decisions, especially in the case of my dismissal where illegal procedures were fairly blatant and self-evident, is obstinacy. <br> <br>I find it disheartening that Taiwan citizens would start an immediate protest over the apparent injustice suffered by a Taiwan citizen, Ms. Yang Shu-chun, even advocating a boycott of South Korean goods, and going so far as to throw eggs at a South Korean school in Taipei and yet greet my case, proved beyond a reasonable doubt, with indifference. Of course, I am entirely sympathetic with Ms. Yang, and, beyond her, to the dignity of Taiwan, if indeed Ms. Yang was treated unjustly or even negligently. But bear in mind, technically (that is, juridically) accusations of injustice against Ms. Yang are still allegations, until a final and formal ruling is made; and even that ruling may be challenged. The point is that merely on the appearance of injustice against a Taiwan citizen, Ms. Yang's fellow citizens took to the streets and insured their vocal protest would be heard. <br> <br>But there's no mere appearance of injustice against me; it's a fact by reasonable juridical standards (i.e official rulings by Taiwan's court and Ministry of Education). Yet NCKU officials continue to refuse to issue a formal apology or compensation or even admit wrongdoing. Apparently, in a revisionist purge of my case, no injustice ever happened.<br> <br>Now so long as NCKU continues its policy of refusing to admit human rights violations, apologize for them, and compensate for them, edits such as happened today on Wikipedia when my human rights entry on the National Cheng Kung University page was removed (though I have since reverted it) will continue to occur. Perhaps Americans should respond to my illegal dismissal the way that Taiwanese responded to the apparent injustice suffered by Ms. Yang at the Taekwondo Olympics in South Korea: make vocal protests against Taiwan, advocate a boycott of Taiwan goods, and insure termination of American academic exchanges with all Taiwan universities. <br> <br>Apart from the human rights issues involved, I cannot accept the disrespect I have been shown as an American professor by official indifference over the human rights that were violated in my case. Apparently you have the time for photo shoots with students to advertise NCKU as an academic institution but don't have the time to respond to a serious issue of human rights violations that, if one includes the need for a formal apology and compensation as guaranteed by international human rights charters, has lasted for eleven years!<br> <br>Once again I urge American universities that maintain academic exchanges with National Cheng Kung University in Tainan to review their bylaws and other relevant laws that might interdict such exchanges based on proved human rights violations. I have already sent necessary documentation, in both Chinese and English, including official Taiwan court and Ministry rulings and these are also available on my human rights blog (<a href="http://rdca45.blogspot.com/">http://rdca45.blogspot.com/</a>) and linked on the Wikipedia page for National Cheng Kung University, since I "reverted" the deleted entry as of today. <br> <br>I encourage you once again to take human rights principles seriously at National Cheng Kung University; to abide by international human rights charters that your president recently formally endorsed; to abide by principles of reciprocity that insures fair and equal treatment of Taiwan students and faculty in the US; and to govern the university by reasonable standards of law and human rights.<br> <br>Sincerely,<br><br>Richard de Canio<br>formerly Department of Foreign Languages and Literature<br>National Cheng Kung University<br>Tainan, Taiwan<br> Human Rights at a Taiwan Universityhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11976319611467243332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5260997520127206909.post-65210595805493069662010-11-27T19:33:00.001-08:002010-11-27T19:33:24.598-08:00Wikipedia Edit, 28 November 2010Dear Jac,<br>Will you please explain why my Human Rights entry on the National Cheng Kung University page was removed for being "poorly sourced"? I don't understand. It's been on for weeks now. It's completely sourced, in both Chinese and English, with official court and Ministry of Education documents. Your removal came on the same day when an editor pushed my human rights entry further down the page with this comment:<br> <br>(cur | prev) 00:37, 28 November 2010 128.232.134.168 (talk) (8,868 bytes) (Moved "Human rights record" section further down the page becuase it seems less important than much of the other content, and of less interest to the general reader.) (undo) <br> <br>I commented on his Talk Page:<br><br>User talk:128.232.134.168<br>From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia<br>Jump to: navigation, search<br><br>Re: your comment: (Moved "Human rights record" section further down the page becuase it seems less important than much of the other content, and of less interest to the general reader.)<br> <br>I don't understand your point of view: what is more important than human rights, especially for a university, which can only stand on moral integrity and human rights. Without human rights on what basis can a university stand: Without the insurance of human rights, how can a university insure the integrity of grading, of the curriculum, of academic promotion? That's why tenure was established at many universities in the first place. Do you really think human rights is of lesser importance than how many colleges there are at a university? Human rights may not be of primary importance in Mainland China, but it should certainly be of primary importance at a university in Taiwan, which calls itself a democracy and which has only recently formally endorsed international human rights charters. --Cincinattus (talk) 03:01, 28 November 2010 (UTC)<br> <br>Your comment was:<br><br>(cur | prev) 00:58, 28 November 2010 Jac16888 (talk | contribs) (7,237 bytes) (→Human Rights Record: rm poorly sourced allegations) (undo) <br><br>But how can these be "poorly sourced allegations"? They're not even "allegations" in the stric legal sense of that word. A person "allegedly" committed a crime until he's convicted; then it's legally justified to say that person committed that crime. An allegation is an accusation that has not been verified. But both court and Ministry of Education documents have fully verified my statement, which therefore cannot be called mere "allegations."<br> <br>If these were indeed "allegations" they would have been removed immediately as soon as I posted them, but they were not, once I "sourced" the claims with legal documents (and if court and Ministry of Education rulings and letters are not "legal" then I don't understand what currency the word "legal" has on Wikipedia. Why was my entry left on for seeks after I "sourced" it then removed on the same day that user 128.232.134.168 thought legal rights "less important" and of "less interest"? First, human rights are of primary importance to a university, or at least should be. If 128.232.134.168 thinks otherwise, he or she has a right to that opinion; but I doubt it would be shared by most academics. And I'm not sure if a university should establish itself on what's interesting or uninteresting. I think a university should establish itself on what's just or unjust. The recent incident regarding Ms. Yang Shun-chun shows how sensitive the issue of injustice can be in Taiwan, or does the issue of justice just pertain to Taiwanese and not to foreigners? <br> <br>But evidently the agenda of 128.232.134.168 is different from mine, so I'll address the main issue here to you. Please Jac, explain to me what you mean by "unsourced" and why this claim was made only now and not before when the sourcing has not changed since it was first entered no later than November 7, 2010. Thanks for your consideration, Jac.<br> --~~~~<br> Human Rights at a Taiwan Universityhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11976319611467243332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5260997520127206909.post-15939025923847492382010-11-11T06:00:00.001-08:002010-11-11T06:00:26.261-08:00Advisory on Academic Exchanges with National Cheng Kung UniversityDear University Administration,<br><br>I assume you currently maintain academic exchanges with National Cheng Kung University in Tainan, Taiwan. In view of documented human rights abuses over more than ten years at that university (see the Wikipedia English-language entry for National Cheng Kung University at <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Cheng_Kung_University">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Cheng_Kung_University</a>), unresolved to the present day, your university may wish to reconsider academic exchanges with this university, or even if continued exchanges with this university might violate ethical principles or laws, statutes, or bylaws of your university administration or the regional accreditation institute. <br> <br>Certainly continued exchanges with a university that defies basic principles of human rights is not in the best interests of a university. Additionally if human rights violations are tolerated here then on what consistent basis can a university terminate exchanges with another university that also violates human rights? <br> <br>In 1999, a defamatory letter was secretly circulated at several "oversight" committees to insure an illegal dismissal started in the Department of Foreign Languages. Presumably NCKU "oversight" committees were determined to exculpate their colleagues rather than protect the rights of the appellant.<br> <br>After that dismissal was canceled in December 1999, the university claimed foreign teachers were not protected by the Teachers Law (patently false, as Wikipedia links show), so the case was now punitively treated as a pending hiring action instead of a canceled dismissal action, jeopardizing the teacher's employment on a new basis. This violates the principle of appeal, namely that one benefits from a favorable ruling, or why appeal?<br> <br>The university subsequently held "appeal" and "review" hearings at which the secret letter was circulated, and attended hearings at the Ministry of Education. When it lost the case, it then claimed foreigners had no right to appeal!<br> <br>At least in US law the legal principle of estoppel prevents such duplicity, where a legal claim contradicts a previously established legal agreement (namely, my right to appeal, or why would the university hold appeal hearings and attend them in Taipei?).<br> <br>Whether estoppel is observed under Taiwan law is beside the point. The university's action violated the basic principles of honesty and good faith. Grade school kids ("sore losers") are expected to act like this, but not university officials! If the university violates these basic principles of fair play how can it expect its students to abide by them? Or how, on that basis, can it expect to maintain academic exchanges with universities in democracies abroad?<br> <br>When the university could not win at the Ministry level it then filed a lawsuit! When it lost the lawsuit it then appealed and delayed enforcing the Ministry ruling in the meantime, using the pending court appeal as a new tactic to deny retroactive contracts and reinstatement.<br> <br>In fact two NCKU officials tried to intimidate me saying the university would delay the case indefinitely in the courts unless I resigned! This is AFTER I won a legal Ministry ruling based on hearings university officials attended and never contested! Apart from obvious ethical principles, this violates another legal principle of US law, that a party cannot make a claim it failed to make at the appropriate time.<br> <br>After eight warning letters from the Ministry of Education (see my Human Rights blog at <a href="http://rdca45.blogspot.com/">http://rdca45.blogspot.com/</a>), the university finally complied with the Ministry ruling dated 8 January 2001 in May 2003, nearly two and a half years later! Scholars at Risk, an international human rights group now based in New York, also sent two letters.<br> <br>Presumably the university thinks it's a law unto itself. This is okay if you follow higher laws (Jesus, Buddah, Confucius, Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Jr.) but not if you ignore them. And I see no rational excuse for ignoring the constitutional laws of one's own country, assuming they don't violate higher principles (equality under the law, basic freedoms of speech, religion, assembly, etc.). Moreover, these are laws university officials never contested until they lost the case.<br> <br>Sincerely,<br><br>Richard de Canio<br>Formerly Associate Professor<br>Department of Foreign Languages and Literature<br>National Cheng Kung University<br>Tainan, Taiwan<br> Human Rights at a Taiwan Universityhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11976319611467243332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5260997520127206909.post-86472844355206989282010-11-11T01:00:00.001-08:002010-11-11T01:00:38.539-08:00A Public Letter Exposing Official Dereliction at National Cheng Kung Univeristy, under the administration of Michael Ming-Chiao LaiNovember 11, 2010<br><br>The goal of this public letter about an illegal dismissal at National Cheng Kung University is to remind officials there that they are civil servants and, as such, are bound by law to carry out their duties, whether they find it expedient to obey the law or not. That's what "executive" means, "to execute" the laws, including those of the university and of the nation.<br> <br>There's no dispute the law is on my side. The court ruling said so. The Ministry of Education ruling said so. <br><br>No matter that former university president, Kao Chiang, defied that ruling for nearly two and a half years. No matter that recently someone tried to revert the Wikipedia entry on this human rights scandal with the words, "If true, a travesty, but no evidence or specifics provided. Also, sadly, it is a fact that at the time the alleged incident occured, foreign faculty were not protected by the Teachers Law of the ROC."<br> <br>Both of these claims are false, as Wikipedia sources now prove. This is no "alleged incident," it's a "fact." And what the writer claims, in his revisionist apologetics, was not a fact (that "foreign faculty were not protected by the Teachers Law of the ROC") was indisputably a fact: teachers were protected by the "Teachers Law of the ROC," as both Ministry and court rulings, both linked to the Wikepedia entry, prove. <br> <br>Therefore, by this writer's own words, the human rights violations over the last ten years were indeed a "travesty" of justice and they will tarnish the reputation of National Cheng Kung University for years to come. Moreover, this is due to the lack of oversight at our university. <br> <br>If our university committees had stopped this dismissal from the beginning, in the first College review, this scandal could have been aborted. But none of these officials lived up to their responsibility as custodians of the university's moral (and ultimately academic) reputation. Indeed, they sacrificed that reputation for their own selfish interests, indolent ignorance, or timid conformity. <br> <br>In sum, the university effected an illegal dismissal in 1999. The salient facts are included on the National Cheng Kung University page of the English Wikipedia (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Cheng_Kung_University">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Cheng_Kung_University</a>). For more than ten years university officials have refused to enforce remedy of those violations at this university. The current president, Michael Ming-Chiao Lai, has not even deigned to see me once, though he's been president nearly four years. <br> <br>Only this week President Lai assigned a vice-president (and president-elect) to talk to a member of the Teacher's Union about the case. In other words, after ten years, Dr. Lai still doesn't think this issue is important enough to talk to the plaintiff personally! Not that talk, at this late stage, would make a difference, but at least it would show minimal courtesy.<br> <br>The president of the United States, with the whole world on his shoulders, will talk to the common people in a local dispute that happened thousands of miles from the White House; but the president of this university does not have the time to talk to his own colleague, indeed his senior colleague, about grievous human rights issues for which university officials are fully responsible. <br> <br>Even as recently as today I was informed by Dr. Lai's office that he was busy with the university's anniversary, with no invitation to a meeting next week (unless the anniversary lasts the entire academic year)! This is typical of the dilatory tactics and disrespect NCKU officials have shown. <br> <br>I have seen photos on the official NCKU web page of Dr. Lai with foreign students who elect to study at NCKU. He can find the time for these students, presumably to inflate the reputation of the university, but then he ignores human rights issues that he is bound, both by law and now by international law (President Ma recently signed international human rights charters) to enforce; and which, in the long term, will inflate or deflate the university's reputation far more decisively than a mere student testimonial that he chose to study at NCKU!<br> <br>Even when subordinate officials deign to see me or a colleague about the issue, they use the usual "gathering the facts" tactic, a gambit that has been overplayed for ten years. If these officials don't know the facts of a serious human rights issue then they should be dismissed from office. <br> <br>Don't officials at NCKU do their homework? As a student I would never visit a professor unless I had fully mastered the material and needed only to gloss a word, phrase, or sentence properly so we could engage in intelligent dialogue based on a shared knowledge. <br> <br>Yet these officials invariably start every meeting with yet another review of the facts. Some studiously scribble on a pad to look responsive. But if they were responsive there wouldn't have to be a meeting at all; they would have acted on the facts they should have known.<br> <br>Presumably these officials believe, though they are paid by taxpayers, they are accountable only to their colleagues. After all, they don't bump shoulders with the taxpayer daily, but with their colleagues, whom they have to please, not the taxpayers, which means, in the long run, not the law. <br> <br>Thus a culture of arrogance has developed at National Cheng Kung University that the public should be aware of and that should not be tolerated if the public takes pride in its young, and still formative, democracy. If even high-ranked academic institutions in Taiwan lack moral probity or integrity, then there's less hope for democracy in Taiwan.<br> <br>Public officials here must be given the message loud and clear: they are public servants, not public masters. Hence the phrase "civil servants," not "civil masters." They are servants because, presumably, they serve the people and the law that ideally protects the people. If Dr. Lai does not understand this he should be summarily removed from office. If he is not removed from office, or does not have the decency to resign, I shall continue to expose this case internationally anyway, which will further compromise the reputation of National Cheng Kung University. Yet my goal is not to compromise the reputation of the university; my goal is to protect my reputation and the reputation of American professors who come after me. I will not compromise that goal.<br> <br>One thing I insure all parties involved: This case will be resolved according to the principles of law and of international law. The sooner this goal is achieved the better it will be for all parties involved.<br><br> Sincerely,<br><br>Richard de Canio<br>Formerly, Dept. of Foreign Languages and Literature<br>National Cheng Kung University<br>Tainan, Taiwan<br> Human Rights at a Taiwan Universityhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11976319611467243332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5260997520127206909.post-78168463689982146372010-11-10T22:24:00.001-08:002010-11-10T22:24:23.483-08:00TIMES HIGHER EDUCATION<p>11 November 2010<p>Dear Times Higher Education Staff,<p>In view of the high ranking that National Cheng Kung Univeristy, in<br>Tainan, Taiwan, has received in your journal, I think it useful to<br>inform you of long-standing human rights violations at that<br>university.<p>The issues, dating back to 1999, were recently uploaded to the<br>Wikipedia entry on National Cheng Kung University<br>(<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Cheng_Kung_University">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Cheng_Kung_University</a>). Besides<br>an overview in English there are historical and legal documents,<br>mainly in Chinese, related to the case as linked files on the<br>Wikipedia page.<p>It seems to me the university's intransigence in formally resolving<br>these issues, or even admitting human rights were committed though<br>legal documents prove otherwise, undermines its credibility as a<br>reputable academic institution. An academic institution stands or<br>falls on human rights enforcement; otherwise, its integrity in other<br>areas, such as research, curriculum, and grading, is compromised.<br>Faculty cannot perform with integrity in a climate of fear.<p>I believe only international exposure will put pressure on the<br>university to enforce human rights here and protect foreign faculty,<br>even local faculty, in the future.<p>Sincerely,<p>Richard de Canio<br>formerly, Associate Professor<br>Department of Foreign Languages and Literature<br>National Cheng Kung Univeristy<br>Tainan, TaiwanHuman Rights at a Taiwan Universityhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11976319611467243332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5260997520127206909.post-79832895136805212992010-11-07T04:56:00.000-08:002010-11-08T18:21:50.613-08:00Fwd: Regarding false student accusations made against me in the 1999 dismissal.<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">---------- Forwarded message ----------<br>From: <b class="gmail_sendername">Richard John</b> <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:rdca25@gmail.com">rdca25@gmail.com</a>></span><br>Date: Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 8:54 PM<br> Subject: Regarding false student accusations made against me in the 1999 dismissal.<br>To: <a href="mailto:em50000@email.ncku.edu.tw">em50000@email.ncku.edu.tw</a><br>Cc: <a href="mailto:hhhwung@mail.ncku.edu.tw">hhhwung@mail.ncku.edu.tw</a>, <a href="mailto:mail@ms.cy.gov.tw">mail@ms.cy.gov.tw</a>, <a href="mailto:tahr@seed.net.tw">tahr@seed.net.tw</a>, <a href="mailto:tfd@taiwandemocracy.org.tw">tfd@taiwandemocracy.org.tw</a>, <a href="mailto:hefpp@hef.org.tw">hefpp@hef.org.tw</a>, <a href="mailto:scholarsatrisk@nyu.edu">scholarsatrisk@nyu.edu</a>, <a href="mailto:higher@mail.moe.gov.tw">higher@mail.moe.gov.tw</a>, <a href="mailto:lchsiao@taiwandemocracy.org.tw">lchsiao@taiwandemocracy.org.tw</a>, <a href="mailto:em50030@email.ncku.edu.tw">em50030@email.ncku.edu.tw</a><br> <br><br><big><big>Michael Ming-Chiao Lai<br>President<br>National Cheng Kung University<br>Tainan, Taiwan<br><br>November 7, 2010<br><br></big></big>Dear President Lai and Colleagues,<br><br>As you know, there is an outstanding case of a false student accusation made by Chen An-chun in a secret meeting in March 1999, as part of a dismissal action against me. That letter was later secretly circulated at "oversight" committees that upheld my dismissal. I was not even able to view the letter until I took the student to court. <br> <br>The letter was clearly not a legitimate student complaint since it was made eight years after the disputed grade, in secret, and with obvious malicious intent to discredit a teacher. If the letter was a legitimate complaint it would have been submitted as a formal complaint through proper channels soon after the student received her grade so that the teacher could defend himself against the accusation. That was not done. Therefore the university violated the rights of an American professor and must be held accountable for the injury done to the professor under the circumstances, including discrediting his name and reputation and jeopardizing his employment as Associate Professor.<br> <br>I remind you that the student submitted not a single piece of documentation to prove her accusations,and that accusations that could be verified were false. Moreover the letter went beyond a mere complaint about a grade in an attempt to discredit the teacher's character. This did not discourage university officials from secretly and shamefully circulating the letter as part of a so-called dismissal action. <br> <br>No student has the right to submit a secret letter against a teacher. No student has the right to contest a grade eight years after the class. No student has the right to discredit a teacher without even a single document to support her accusations. No university has the right to circulate that letter. No university has the right to ignore such malicious misconduct on the part of a student, especially after disreputable officials at our university acted promptly in response to the student's secret and improper complaint. <br> <br>No university has the right to ignore this case without proper administrative remedy, including punitive action against this student. The issue is complicated by the fact that this student is, according to the official National Cheng Kung University web page, currently employed as an Adjunct Assistant Professor at our university. I find it curious that in 22 years teaching at National Cheng Kung University the only student of mine who complained of a grade received employment status. <br> <br>I strongly urge the president of this university as well as the faculty to take this issue seriously and to effect prompt remedy. It's a disgrace on the part of this university that a secret letter by a student is promptly circulated at official "oversight" hearings while a formal complaint against the student has been ignored. This is unacceptable.<br> <br>The university must uphold human rights here and resolve this case at the formal level. The case started at the formal level when the letter was secretly circulated at several "oversight" committees and it must be resolved at the formal level, through the same committee process. The difference is this time the complaint will be a formal and legitimate complaint made through legal channels of remedy.<br> <br>In any case, I have other legal options available to me if the university does not resolve this case at the formal level, including, through petitions of American human rights groups and advocates, effecting a termination of academic exchanges between National Cheng Kung University and American universities on the basis of human rights violations here.<br> <br>It has fallen on my shoulders to protect the reputation of American professors in Taiwan and I intend to acquit myself of that responsibility with honor. No American professor will be discredited at a Taiwan university with impunity. We in the United States of America do not allow, much less encourage, this kind of treatment against Taiwan professors and professors at National Cheng Kung University should commit themselves to reciprocal protections and respect in the case of American professors.<br> <br>Attached is a comprehensive summary of the student's actions. If I do not receive a sincere reply by Wednesday, 10 November, I will use other legal channels of remedy as insured by international human rights charters, American laws, and US university bylaws, charters, and statutes.<br> <br>Sincerely,<br><br>Richard de Canio<br>Formerly Associate Professor<br>Department of Foreign Languages and Literature<br>National Cheng Kung University<br>Tainan, Taiwan<br> </div><br> Human Rights at a Taiwan Universityhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11976319611467243332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5260997520127206909.post-12123094034166400782010-11-07T01:27:00.000-08:002010-11-08T18:23:48.446-08:00False Accusations in a Dismissal Case at National Cheng Kung University<p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg2ggMoe0L9UhzCk-z69E06GWrHg-FSB0H3AkgBSuHysxuHl5hSPmTojhWQPU0F8XepWPeakxPV6Dv9xlVKZaQD2tBxba9I4XJ042FG6enJfb5-NDrUNcIEuWuxDkBXK6iBu_4OAHh4TRyg/s1600/forged1-731091.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg2ggMoe0L9UhzCk-z69E06GWrHg-FSB0H3AkgBSuHysxuHl5hSPmTojhWQPU0F8XepWPeakxPV6Dv9xlVKZaQD2tBxba9I4XJ042FG6enJfb5-NDrUNcIEuWuxDkBXK6iBu_4OAHh4TRyg/s320/forged1-731091.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5536736963801896658" /></a></p><p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEha0_cFBhnSaHf4TBUZWH3VGpfIPC1dTHvZA3z9ZU9dE3lT8aVc6DKcw_kv8lXY6rkyCQ3TBq3_8zmcjZun-bzDAjaIaVrKh3CNyzmVDgJKCIDSEvcUSTle90T2C_382lJxf5BiX8sDGlgC/s1600/forged2-731850.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEha0_cFBhnSaHf4TBUZWH3VGpfIPC1dTHvZA3z9ZU9dE3lT8aVc6DKcw_kv8lXY6rkyCQ3TBq3_8zmcjZun-bzDAjaIaVrKh3CNyzmVDgJKCIDSEvcUSTle90T2C_382lJxf5BiX8sDGlgC/s320/forged2-731850.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5536736971286055618" /></a></p><p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi0HCXBY4tgE4_pVjzkD4XQ2WY1VW9zBvoLu1v0L8Ho0ML4eiELLZOh-bSgt8cKnsXzuP89Y3Jz_Iz1ARTYIvcsaBwy1fdlb1hX58Rzvljgw91lQAFIrOc6Vxz5MVQeP1OU8yGCe_Px_1Wz/s1600/forged3-732651.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi0HCXBY4tgE4_pVjzkD4XQ2WY1VW9zBvoLu1v0L8Ho0ML4eiELLZOh-bSgt8cKnsXzuP89Y3Jz_Iz1ARTYIvcsaBwy1fdlb1hX58Rzvljgw91lQAFIrOc6Vxz5MVQeP1OU8yGCe_Px_1Wz/s320/forged3-732651.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5536736971908370514" /></a></p><p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEguCRY2zZZYsmXW0-QTpCJHvLuNPdm9Kgar33n7i7fgf2RuspSCmVULn1vr5oqQ9qqQQ4k1h5JPabMrwxtePB4lGTSAgvIctduwTp-_nSevecYnYSGxsxH44VWgSIOFFRBCl_FjhW083gMp/s1600/forged4-733493.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEguCRY2zZZYsmXW0-QTpCJHvLuNPdm9Kgar33n7i7fgf2RuspSCmVULn1vr5oqQ9qqQQ4k1h5JPabMrwxtePB4lGTSAgvIctduwTp-_nSevecYnYSGxsxH44VWgSIOFFRBCl_FjhW083gMp/s320/forged4-733493.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5536736973729990738" /></a></p><br> Human Rights at a Taiwan Universityhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11976319611467243332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5260997520127206909.post-70154072782105282742010-11-07T01:19:00.000-08:002010-11-08T18:23:14.917-08:00Record of False National Cheng Kung University student accusation<p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhQ4bLZkV5D-c1OwLNmP_90l3J29K8cyUm774rRuBwp26sUFWTJNUpbMF3OMApYGcvLALEXI55KGXUHMNEYyW68ArfX_dkw5jB8M7UZe2PaPVN575vx79Co-gUc-6W8WJgzt1GAwycuH3Hd/s1600/studentChen1-789772.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhQ4bLZkV5D-c1OwLNmP_90l3J29K8cyUm774rRuBwp26sUFWTJNUpbMF3OMApYGcvLALEXI55KGXUHMNEYyW68ArfX_dkw5jB8M7UZe2PaPVN575vx79Co-gUc-6W8WJgzt1GAwycuH3Hd/s320/studentChen1-789772.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5536735070016181458" /></a></p><p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjM2vgn2UiGKkdBrDFxenybHZQ-YmkXEwSZo8af26QnUWWxynl8VH2PB-9h1lkSZC6GDQBaRPV2xiLngfDmucAbuSclGkMwvW7Ewm2ZquEk0Jd1HtgzrSFRlDsyGo3FcMcDKhHxcOdr5EUK/s1600/studentChen2-791240.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjM2vgn2UiGKkdBrDFxenybHZQ-YmkXEwSZo8af26QnUWWxynl8VH2PB-9h1lkSZC6GDQBaRPV2xiLngfDmucAbuSclGkMwvW7Ewm2ZquEk0Jd1HtgzrSFRlDsyGo3FcMcDKhHxcOdr5EUK/s320/studentChen2-791240.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5536735076964649618" /></a></p><p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhn1e9NHD3HZCr2xSp5Lk2UXzTVP6yCjw8QAqJYcKTflrU-DCPXKWZzC8qahHTVJJ-sg0EbWa5944ytQ0QzevZbx58CRKGemIHDh2BQCA7Ye3ZsYPg19esnC-pfXYjkGLXaD_LBsiDQPyCR/s1600/studentChen3-796894.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhn1e9NHD3HZCr2xSp5Lk2UXzTVP6yCjw8QAqJYcKTflrU-DCPXKWZzC8qahHTVJJ-sg0EbWa5944ytQ0QzevZbx58CRKGemIHDh2BQCA7Ye3ZsYPg19esnC-pfXYjkGLXaD_LBsiDQPyCR/s320/studentChen3-796894.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5536735102856637410" /></a></p><p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEie1YdHnKkeT-evTl1oXpBk2sQ_YBvR-LuuGA3OVAV8SPtGMMCoaK9E3_Z33JZKEBdLl2MxsxTB643ToHcraqS2fa0zNBaI2ygMXPtLe_4lSTelAuvdt5fvY_0ouNuh6M67AbFI1pD0B2vG/s1600/studentChen4-797677.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEie1YdHnKkeT-evTl1oXpBk2sQ_YBvR-LuuGA3OVAV8SPtGMMCoaK9E3_Z33JZKEBdLl2MxsxTB643ToHcraqS2fa0zNBaI2ygMXPtLe_4lSTelAuvdt5fvY_0ouNuh6M67AbFI1pD0B2vG/s320/studentChen4-797677.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5536735104702034946" /></a></p><p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi46dpr498bNi70ErnbcqOOWN8jZ8fV-j3U_Lfll4pWbcLXGnQbqOZi1oa-4nRnSRKSIXVOOY38xSmqkyu7v58H_kaA0HJrcAucafHUV0U0zq4TAJGXkK8wW6Lyc2Qcyc-Ars5jU1TbcVzt/s1600/studentChen5-798437.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi46dpr498bNi70ErnbcqOOWN8jZ8fV-j3U_Lfll4pWbcLXGnQbqOZi1oa-4nRnSRKSIXVOOY38xSmqkyu7v58H_kaA0HJrcAucafHUV0U0zq4TAJGXkK8wW6Lyc2Qcyc-Ars5jU1TbcVzt/s320/studentChen5-798437.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5536735107237551650" /></a></p><p class="mobile-photo"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjDgKtFP3X18bG7Ii1S274cJqjREX_WQPy-fOSaz8zdBpDVN7WrFWTwbm2g5KSdG7AqORk0SwWu6-tYBo5AMzdYm3G3fBwvAL4ODjnqK10QmqC9S1g1xKDunXWH-gUMbNDp9ZZkV2ScRQwK/s1600/studentChen6-799169.JPG"><img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjDgKtFP3X18bG7Ii1S274cJqjREX_WQPy-fOSaz8zdBpDVN7WrFWTwbm2g5KSdG7AqORk0SwWu6-tYBo5AMzdYm3G3fBwvAL4ODjnqK10QmqC9S1g1xKDunXWH-gUMbNDp9ZZkV2ScRQwK/s320/studentChen6-799169.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5536735111619741938" /></a></p><br> Human Rights at a Taiwan Universityhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11976319611467243332noreply@blogger.com0