-------- Original Message --------
| Subject: | Second Letter to Lai Ming-Chiao, president of National Cheng Kung University |
|---|---|
| Date: | Thu, 22 Mar 2007 11:22:32 -0700 |
| From: | Richard <rdca25@yahoo.com> |
| To: | em50000@email.ncku.edu.tw |
| CC: | lee38@mail.moe.gov.tw, MOE <higher@mail.moe.gov.tw>, ppaeu@mail.moe.gov.tw, peu03@mail.gio.gov.tw, eyemail@eyemail.gio.gov.tw |
President
National Cheng Kung University
22 March 2007
Dear President Lai,
I've been informed by your secretary that (allowing for translation nuances) you find it "inconvenient" to talk to me about the case involving human rights abuses at our university. The reason she gave was that the case was pending in the courts.
At a follow-up conversation, she said you had read my email addressed to you. But I still have not received an official reply.
First, I think you should understand that, as an official of this university, you should serve the needs of this university. And, unless I am mistaken, in a democracy, there's none more needy than one whose human rights have been violated.
Your argument that this case was pending in the courts has no bearing on your responsibilities as president of a university to enforce laws and establish moral guidelines. If not you, who?
Though I have no doubt the court will continue to rule on the basis of human rights and legal principles shared by the international community (how could a democratic court do otherwise?), you must understand that the advance of human rights begins at a university. This university either believes in, and advances, human rights or it doesn't.
Litigation is not the same as moral principles and human rights. Those can not be litigated away, regardless what our university administration may think. When this case is finally exposed in the international press, you shall find how true this is, unfortunately to the cost of our university's reputation as well as your own.
The facts are plain.
First, despite countless human rights violations, which the Ministry of Education Appeal Committee saw fit to boldface in order to call attention to them, our own university committees upheld the illegal dismissal action. What does that say about the quality of our university committees, despite prestigious epithets, like "review" and "appeal"?
Second, after the Ministry of Education ruling of 8 January 2001, in my favor, your predecessor, Mr. Kao Chiang, defied that ruling for more than two years. He even told an international Human Rights group, Scholars at Risk, that he was "following laws," even as he was defying a legal Ministry of Education ruling. Not only wasn't he punished for his defiance, but he was allowed a second term as president!
Third, your lawyer argued that foreigners are not allowed the same protections as native Taiwanese at our university. Either you defend this position or you don't. As a president of a university, you can't take a neutral position, though you may wish to do so.
As a teacher I uphold the position that male and female students should be graded equally, without prejudice. If this matter is litigated by your lawyer, who claims one gender does not have the same rights as another gender, do you think I will suspend fair grading until this case is resolved in the courts?
Of course not. Male and female students will continue to be graded with fairness, equally. In fact, even if the courts ruled against one gender, I would still insist on the moral principle of grading equally.
If the university disallowed this, I would publicly resign and request a press conference and give the reason for my resignation. I would also contact international human rights groups, as indeed, I have in my own case, which, as you say, is "pending" in the courts.
Besides, I should remind you. This case is NOT pending. The university participated in a Ministry of Education Appeal that favored me, as you must surely be aware.
In fact, the university itself held appeal hearings. So many, in fact, I lost count! This was presumably on the principle that if one pill cures, an overdose would kill.
Fortunately, the patient did not die and continues to fight for his rights at our university. This is doubly fortunate, for, despite the fact that Taiwan is a democracy, and a university is usually in advance of human rights advocacy, I am fighting this case alone.
No protests have formed on campus over this case. No colleagues from my department have taken a stand on this issue, so far as I know.
On the contrary, their attitude seems one of absolute indifference, if not annoyance. So much for human rights awareness at our university; though, admittedly, there's a lot of human rights awareness when the issue is human rights abuses in Mainland China.
I think you know that several years ago a technical conflict of interest case at a Hong Kong university made headline news in the papers. It was the lead-in story in the televised media.
My case involves more than technical issues. It includes aggravated abuses, defiant noncompliance with university and Ministry laws, duplicity (our university loses an appeal then claims I have no right to appeal!), repeated violations, and more, yet press and media have been mostly silent about it!
At what other university in a democracy that you know of, would a university participate in appeal hearings at the Ministry level, and even hold countless hearings on its own, only to claim, after losing the appeal, that the appellant never had the right to appeal in the first place?
What other university would maintain academic exchanges with universities and colleges that insure Taiwan faculty of equal rights while denying those same rights to foreign faculty in Taiwan?
Moreover, our university continues to litigate on the apparent principle that the main goal is to win a case rather than advance human rights principles here.
Or do you see human rights principles the university is upholding in this case, which it stubbornly refuses to concede? Either way, you must take a stand.
I remind you, also, this case is being contested with taxpayers' money. Yet even now many Taiwan parents are worried about funding their children's education at a four-year university.
Isn't our money better spent on enabling disadvantaged young scholars to attend our university instead of being used to undermine human rights principles, with grievous long-term consequences to the reputation of our university?
For even now, the facts of this case are being circulated to human rights groups around the world.
This case will not disappear. The issues of this case will not disappear.
In the end, there will be a public reckoning of university officials involved in this case, regarding human rights violations or indifference to them. I have no sympathy for those officials. But it would be unfortunate if the reputation of our university suffered because of them.
Sincerely,
Richard de Canio
Department of Foreign Languages and Literature
National Cheng Kung University
Tainan, Taiwan
ROC
No comments:
Post a Comment