Letter to NCKU president, Kao Chiang concerning student misconduct

From:
9/5/2004 12:56 PM
Subject: Regarding the university employment of a student named
ChenTo: Kao Chiang
CC: moe , Control Yuan ,
Vice-President Lu ,
eyemail@eyemail.gio.gov.tw, peu03@mail.gio.gov.tw

Kao Chiang
President's Office
National Cheng Kung University
Tainan, Taiwan

5 September 2004

Dear President Kao,

As you know, there is a current part-time employee at our university,
surnamed Chen, who wrote a secret and spiteful letter against her former
teacher. In her letter, dated 8 June 1999, she claimed she failed
unfairly eight years before.
That in itself would make the letter laughable, as others have
said. The accusation of failing unfairly could not possibly be proved
or disproved eight years later. Therefore the seeming purpose of her
letter was to spitefully discredit her former teacher.
The fact that the letter, laughable as it was and without proof,
was accepted by NCKU officials further discredits the student's letter.
Obviously these officials knew the letter to be false or why would they
keep it secret but use it at a professor's dismissal hearings?
That you yourself defied a legal Ministry ruling (dated 8 January
2001) for more than two years undermines any confidence I may have in
lawful enforcement at our university. Nonetheless, as a document to be
used in later legal action I may need to take, I formally request that
you, as president of our university, take responsibility for reviewing
Chen's university employment and effect her dismissal once the facts
have been established.
By "establishing the facts" I don't mean (like other officials
might mean) taking two or three years "collecting evidence" when the
evidence (the student's letter) is already "collected." All that's
required is to ask the student if the signature is hers, then ask what
proof she has for her claim.
By "proof" I don't mean Chen's simply saying so. By proof I mean
legal standards observed all over the world, even in communist
countries.
(Communist officials might falsify proof. But they would still
have enough respect for law and public opinion at least to make a show
of proof, however false the claim. But in this case, university
officials had so little respect for law and public opinion they did not
even try to make a show of proof! Their actions have seriously weakened
the rule of law at our university. Some of these officials have since
transferred to other colleges, having asked early retirement. Instead
of being punished for their misconduct, they now collect double
salaries, leaving their former colleagues the task of correcting
abuses.)
I remind you that Chen's university employment concerns not only
the university but all taxpayers, who have the right to equal
opportunity for their children, many of whom were probably worthy of
employment at our university.
Chen's letter itself would have discredited her in other
universities. Yet there is reasonable suspicion her letter helped her
at our university. These are matters that should concern you. If not,
they will certainly concern others.

Sincerely,

Richard de Canio
Department of Foreign Languages and Literature
National Cheng Kung University
Tainan, Taiwan