From:
9/20/2001 10:57 AM
Subject: Urgent messageTo: chenwj@ccms.ntu.edu.tw
President Wei-Jao Chen
Office of the President
National Taiwan University
19 September 2001
Dear President Chen,
I am taking the liberty of writing because of the exceptional
circumstances of my situation. I am addressing my concerns to you
because of the national prestige of the university of which you are
president, and because, in addition, you are the president of the
Association of National Universities of Taiwan.
I wish to bring to your attention rights violations at National
Cheng Kung University in Tainan, Taiwan.
National Cheng Kung University is currently involved in a dispute
with the Ministry of Education concerning the issuance of a teaching
contract to me, following an appeal decision in my favor. The Ministry
of Education has admonished the university to issue the contract, based
on principles of law, but to no avail.
In addition, university committees, in defiance of the Ministry
decision, continue to convene to "investigate" me. In light of the
Ministry decision, these committees must be considered "legal fictions,"
intended to harass and humiliate me and finally induce my resignation
from the university.
The president of the university, Kao Chiang, claims no control over
these actions or the university's failure to issue the contract in
compliance with the Ministry ruling. This challenges belief in law at
National Cheng Kung University; for I know of no university in the
world, much less in a democracy, that can defy a legal judgment in this
way.
The university claims my appeal victory merely authorizes the
university to further investigate me. But if an appeal were not final,
it would be an exercise in futility.
The university used its full authority and resources to make a case
against me and failed. To claim it can try again until it succeeds
shows contempt for law as well as human rights. A true democracy
protects individuals from such abuses of power.
Taiwan professors are protected by laws when they teach in
democracies abroad; they are therefore obligated to insure that foreign
professors in Taiwan are also protected.
Unfortunately, based on the evidence of this case, violations of
rights and democratic process at National Cheng Kung University are
routine:
In March of 1999, the Chair of the Department of Foreign Languages
and Literature dismissed me based on accusations that were not
investigated and of which I was not informed.
Similarly, the Dean of the College of Liberal Arts accepted secret
accusations against me. These were neither proved nor investigated nor
was I informed of them. But they were secretly circulated to several
committees to insure my dismissal.
In late 1999, I "won" a university appeal. But this was a tactical
action and the university "interpreted" it to mean that, as a foreigner,
I should be reviewed again.
After two years contesting my dismissal, I won on appeal to the
Ministry of Education Appeal Committee, which issued a strongly worded
statement listing rights violations committed by university officials.
But the university continues to defy this decision, as well as laws
protecting rights of teachers regardless of nationality. At stake is not
only law, but honesty; for the university participated in the appeal
process but will not honor the appeal decision.
Instead, committee members at National Cheng Kung University continue
to investigate me, indifferent to the legal authority of the MOE
ruling or to my rights as a professor and dignity as an individual.
These committee members would protest similar abuses against themselves
or their children at foreign universities. They would be outraged if
their child, after winning an appeal, was subject to further
investigations for the same accusations. Or, if having passed an exam,
the child was told she must pass again.
The failure of moral and legal principles at National Cheng Kung
University is evident. Presumably university officials believe that if
they unite in defiance of the law their defiance is justified. This is
neither an enlightened nor a just nor a prudent position to take. A
majority can have laws passed but it cannot, with impunity, undo the
legal force of existing laws or legal judgments.
One would think university officials would know this. Yet what is
especially disturbing at National Cheng Kung University is that
impaneled faculty sitting on my case have almost unanimously scorned the
MOE decision. That this scorn for legal rights and protections
especially profiles foreign teachers should arouse indignation in the
larger academic community.
During the more than two years that I’ve appealed this case, I have
suspended my academic career; I have spent hundreds of thousands of
dollars in living expenses, while my bank account has dwindled; my
medical insurance has been suspended, compromising my health care; my
teaching pension from ten years of teaching at National Cheng Kung
University is threatened; and I have had to renew my visa countless
times, taking numerous trips outside of Taiwan, adding additional
expenses during a period when I have had no income.
In addition, sympathetic colleagues have dedicated countless hours to
effect a justice that university officials appear to be ignorant of, or
indifferent to, despite their tax-paid positions. We have persevered in
the face of anonymous letters to visa offices to deny me a visa and to
the university personnel office to have me expelled from university
housing, presumably to abort a just resolution of this case.
Yet, after two and a half years appealing to the law, the university
refuses to honor the law. Indeed, educated officials have repeatedly
informed me either they do not know the laws or do not care about them.
But university officials should realize the justice they serve is really
their own.
Sincerely,
Professor Richard de Canio
Department of Foreign Languages and Literature
National Cheng Kung University.
(06) 237 8626
No comments:
Post a Comment