Regarding your comments to the NCCU student newspaper

Subject:
Regarding your comments to the NCCU student newspaper
From:
Richard
Date:
Fri, 19 May 2006 10:22:16 -0700
To:
em50030@email.ncku.edu.tw
CC:
MOE , MOE , Control Yuan , Prime Minister , Prime Minister

Yang, Ming-Tzong
Secretary-General
National Cheng Kung University
Tainan, Taiwan

19 May 2006

Dear Professor Yang,

I am puzzled by remarks you were quoted as saying to an NCCU (student) newspaper, to the effect that (English translation) the university was following Ministry of Education directions in the handling of my case. That comment was made despite the fact that Mr. Kao Chiang, president of our university, delayed enforcing a legal Ministry ruling for more than two years. Moreover, his administration has delayed the full benefits of that ruling up to now.
Do you consider this acceptable? If so, why have a Ministry appeal process at all? Is it because our university wishes to pretend to a democratic process that it doesn't really believe in?
Apart from the legal Ministry ruling in my favor, dated 8 January 2006, the Ministry of Education has issued numerous warnings in the form of letters to Mr. Kao requesting that he follow regulations.
Is this your idea of following laws? Do you think the Ministry of Education issues letters to the president of a university because it has nothing better to do?
Why do you think warning letters for compliance are issued if the university was in compliance to begin with? Why do you think the university was forced to finally comply with the Ministry ruling of 8 January 2001 two years later?
The university must have been in the wrong to begin with. Are you proud of the fact that it took National Cheng Kung University two years to comply with the law? That's not something I would be proud of or boast of to a student newspaper. After all, educated people read newspapers and they will make up their minds based on the moral principles that, presumably, were part of their education. Moreover, the fact that no official has yet been punished for this official misconduct should embarrass you, not encourage or embolden you.
You're not supposed to rationalize decisions made by your superiors when those superiors are clearly in the wrong. You're not supposed to defend the actions of your superior; you're supposed to defend the law. And if a legal Ministry ruling is not the law then I'd like to know what is the law in Taiwan? No "ad hoc" committee (a phrase you're quoted as using in the NCCU article) can replace the law of a country. No lawyer can replace the law of a country. No official, regardless what his official title is, can replace the law of a country. It's precisely because many officials at our university do not understand these basic principles that our university has been dragged through this mess.
Your quoted words to the NCCU newspaper continue (in English translation): "De Canio's numerous petitions let the Ministry of Education continuously ask investigation, which provoked the university. [He thought that] if the Ministry of Education did think this is improper, they could investigate themselves. The University will cooperate completely."
What do you mean by "provoking" the university (though I admit that's only an English translation of the word you used; still I assume it's close to the word you used). Who provoked whom? The university held secret meetings; the university circulated a secret letter; the university presumably solicited a student to write a malicious letter (why else would a student complain of a grade eight years later, the day before a scheduled dismissal meeting?); the university violated numerous basic legal principles, boldfaced by the Ministry Appeal ruling; the university delayed enforcing that ruling for more than two years; the university contested an American citizen's right to appeal even after the appeal process was completed and the university fully participated in that appeal process; the university continues to simulate meetings in my case as if those meetings were legally authorized.
Who provoked whom? Since when does a university have the right to "review," "contest," or even "approve" a superior ruling of the Minsitry of Education? That's not the law, Mr. Yang. That's against the law, unless the law has no meaning at all.
Once again I urge you to consider the consequences of defying the law. Whatever benefits a few officials get in the short run will not benefit our university in the long run.
One thing I assure you: this case will not be over until I receive the full benefits of the legal Ministry ruling of 8 January 2006. That includes a formal apology and complete compensation. No "ad hoc" committee will deprive me of my rights or even "approve" those rights. My rights in a democracy are insured by the law and, specifically, by the legal Ministry ruling of 8 January 2006.

Sincerely,

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