Vice President for Ethics and Compliance
Purdue University
30 September 2009
Dear Dr. Rollock,
Since you are in charge of Ethics and Compliance at Purdue University, you may be able to assist me in human rights issues at National Cheng Kung University (NCKU) in Tainan, Taiwan, with which Purdue has had a long-term academic relationship.
In 2001, Taiwan's Ministry of Education canceled my illegal dismissal (1999-2000), boldfacing human rights violations. Instead of reinstating me, NCKU argued foreigners had no right to appeal, even though the university held appeal hearings and attended Ministry hearings! (See attached, 1.) Apart from not honoring an appeal the university itself participated in, the fact that NCKU would try to enforce discriminatory practices against foreign faculty should concern an American university with academic exchanges here.
After defying Ministry of Eduction directives for more than two years, the university finally reinstated me in 2003, but without formal redress. As a professor and American citizen, I do not believe disregard for human rights should be a basis for academic exchanges with a university in a democratic country, especially my own.
Currently several high-ranking university officials at NCKU are American citizens or have benefited from American democratic values. They have ignored my petitions to formally resolve this case with apologies, penalties, and compensation according to internationally recognized principles of law.
Our universities should not maintain academic exchanges with a university that flagrantly violates human rights and scorns human rights principles. Academic exchanges should entail some degree of reciprocity.
If, as was stated on the Purdue University news page, NCKU "is one of the most outstanding universities in Asia, if not the world," one must question if human rights are relevant in this assessment, or if human rights are relevant at all.
The current president, Dr. Michael M. C. Lai, hasn't even responded to several requests to discuss this issue. Under the circumstances, I hope Purdue University, with which NCKU has academic exchanges, can request formal closure in this case.
Sincerely,
Richard de Canio
Department of Foreign Languages and Literature
National Cheng Kung University
Letters from Taiwan's Ministry of Education to National Cheng Kung University's President
Regarding Enforcement of an Appeal Ruling
These are English translations of eight letters from the Ministry of Education to National Cheng Kung University concerning my illegal dismissal and the university's refusal to abide by a legal Ministry ruling, even though the university participated in appeal hearings and only challenged my right to appeal after the ruling favored me. It even filed a lawsuit to challenge the Ministry's ruling, then used the court case to try to further delay issuing the contracts!Regarding Enforcement of an Appeal Ruling
(The translations are by a member of the NCKU Faculty Union. Chinese copies are attached in JPEG and PDF formats. Below are paraphrases. In any version, the unprincipled conduct of National Cheng Kung University is evident.)
1. April 6, 2001: "The university should make lawful remedy within a month."
2. May 11, 2001 "The university should first revive the contract with Mr. De Canio, which is the proper remedy."
3. June 14, 2001 "If there is no practical revival of the contract, the decision of the MOE Appeals Committee is equivalent to vain words. Procedural justice should be upheld first. The university should not use the results of its previous improper procedures as an excuse to delay reinstating the professor."
4. August 7, 2001 "If the university willfully delays so as to damage the teacher’s rights, the university must bear complete responsibility."
5. May 3, 2002 "The university should first revive the contract with Mr. De Canio starting from August 1, 1999, and compensate his salary. There is no need to wait for the court verdict."
6. October 15, 2002 "The university should immediately process the application of contract extension permit."
7. December 2, 2002 "The university’s request to wait for the court verdict is denied. Revive the contract with Mr. De Canio and compensate his salary as soon as possible."
8. January 17, 2003 "Do as described in the letter of December 2, 2002."
