Subject:
http://eyemail.gio.gov.tw:9100/cgi-bin/show_re_mail?msgid=230035&check=vertigo
[Image]
[Image]
±H¥ó¥Á²³: "vertigo@ms22.hinet.net"
±H¥ó¤é´Á: TUE, 14 OCT 2003 09:20:46
¥D¡@¡@¦®: Petition for Removal of officials at National
Cheng Kung University
ªþÀɼƶq: 0 ÓÀÉ®×
Ministry of Education
Department of Higher Education
cc: Office of the Premier, Minister of Education, Control
Yuan, Taiwan
Commission on Human Rights, Taiwan Association for Human
Rights, The
Judicial Reform Foundation
14 October 2003
Dear Ministry Officials,
Because of their indifference to laws and routine process
at
National Cheng Kung University, in Tainan, I strongly
advise the removal
from office of its current president, Kao Chiang and its
current Dean of
Student Affairs, Ko Huei-chen.
Both of these officials have shown a pattern of contempt
for the
law as well as for their official responsibilities. Instead
of
representing Taiwan's laws, they seem to be taking the law
into their
own hands. Instead of appealing to law, they appeal to
lawyers, who
represent not the law but only themselves. Their
negligence,
indifference to laws as well as direct warnings from the
Ministry of
Education, and their delays in handling even the most
routine business
at our university are costing taxpayers millions of
dollars, undermining
confidence in law and remedy at our university, impeding
academic
progress, and discrediting our university as a law-abiding
institution
with academic credibility.
To take only the two most obvious examples, Kao Chiang
defied a
legal Ministry ruling for more than two years, while Dean
Ko defied
repeated requests to perform her duties as Dean of Student
Affairs by
calling a student into her office for disciplinary review.
If a
president and dean can do whatever they wish to do, in
defiance of laws
and common principles of office, then there is, strictly
speaking, no "accredited" university, since it is bound to
no authority
but its own.
Indeed, with the assistance of current legal counsel,
litigation
has replaced law at our university. Instead of appealing to
laws,
officials now appeal to lawyers.
However, a democratic society is not governed by litigation
but by
laws. Its legitimacy, moral and legal, comes from laws, not
lawyers. In
a democratic society, litigation is no substitute for the
routine
execution of laws.
First, only laws represent justice, while litigation, in
defiance
of laws and using institutional muscle, represents power.
Taiwan was
not established on the foundation of power but of justice
and law.
Indeed, the international respect that Taiwan has earned is
due to its
laws, not its power. Laws, not power, is what separates
Taiwan, in the
minds of many, from Mainland China.
Second, litigation divides people, while laws unite them.
Litigation is intended to provoke fear, while laws are
intended to
inspire trust. When litigation fails to provoke fear, as
intended, it
arouses righteous hatred and contempt instead, thus
permanently burning
bridges of harmony.
Third, laws are efficient, while litigation impedes
efficiency.
Only laws, not litigation, can serve the interests of a
modern
university that wishes to advance with other universities
to higher
academic standards and goals.
Fourth, litigation undermines confidence in law and moral
principles, replacing respect for justice with respect for
power. These
are not values for a university to espouse.
Fifth, laws represent the long-term interests of the
government in
the constant progress of its universities, while litigation
represents
only the short-term interests of university officials in
the defense of
their personal and selfish agenda to reward their friends
and harass
their perceived adversaries.
Sixth, litigation is costing taxpayers millions of dollars
on
lawsuits that are unnecessary, assuming laws, due process
of law, and
principles of justice were observed in the first place. The
most
obvious example is the university's litigation of the legal
Ministry
ruling in my favor of 8 January 2001. However, that lawsuit
was by no
means the exception. I have heard of several other lawsuits
the
university has lost in recent months. These matters were
better settled
on principles of law instead of policies of power. They
were better
settled by reforming committees and educating them, insted
of inviting
them to stubbornly repeat their mistakes; as if by
compounding their
mistakes they make them right. But since university
officials have
nothing to lose (except taxpayers' money, to which they are
indifferent), they are willing to chance a frivolous or
malicious
lawsuit on the "longshot" they might win or the appellant
might quit.
This kind of high-risk "gambling" is good for back rooms of
sleazy bars
but should have no place in the hallowed halls of a
university.
Therefore, once again I strongly urge you to limit the
damage
already done to our university, remove officials that are
either
maliciously defiant of the law or grievously negligent of
their duties
to the law, and restore the moral and academic legitimacy
of National
Cheng Kung University so it can advance, with other
universities in
Taiwan and elsewhere, as a lawful and respectable
institution of higher
learning.
Sincerely,
Professor Richard de Canio
Department of Foreign Languages and Literature
National Cheng Kung University
(06) 2757575 52235
(06) 237 8626
No comments:
Post a Comment