Letter to Taiwan Ministry of Education

20 February 2002

Dear Minister Huang,

I append a letter I received today from National Cheng Kung University,
informing me that an appeal has been suspended due to their court claim
against my professorship at NCKU.
Clearly, such moral arrogance and legal defiance of an earlier Ministry
ruling in my favor cannot be tolerated in a lawful, indeed democratic,
society.
First of all, the university had no legal sanction to review me after I
won my official appeal at the Ministry level; I merely tolerated the appeal
under strong verbal and written protest. (A copy of this protest was sent,
by registered mail, to the Ministry of Education.)
Such use of office to abuse, persecute, harass, malign, libel, slander,
humiliate, and intimidate a colleague is fairly universally considered abuse
of power, a punishable offense with serious administrative and legal
penalties, including dismissal and possibly imprisonment. Why officials
believe they are above regular legal sanctions for such actions is beyond my
understanding.
But this is no more shocking than the way that university officials at
National Cheng Kung University believe they can get away with deviously
"interpreting" Taiwan laws and rulings. I have said this before, to other
offices, and I will repeat myself: an official in a democracy is not
authorized to interpret laws or official rulings, but to execute them at
face value. No official has the legal authority, and should not have the
moral arrogance, to think he can interpret a ruling in a way clearly opposed
to the obvious or face meaning of the law or ruling.
Now an appeal decision that favors an appellant cannot legitimately be
"interpreted" to mean the appellant must appeal again. No rational or moral
jurist, abiding by legal principles, could possibly interpret a ruling in
this way.
Moreover, legal counsel advising such a devious evasion of the ordinary
meaning of a ruling or law would be guilty of the charge of an obstruction
of justice in at least one legal system I’m familiar with. No official or
legal counsel is authorized to evade, impede, or otherwise obstruct, in any
way, the prompt and complete execution of laws or rulings according to their
face meaning. There is no rational person anywhere in the world who would
interpret a ruling favoring an appellant as a ruling to review the appellant
again.
I remind you that this is, indeed, the second time the university has
deviously interpreted laws to nullify my legal benefits. The first time was
on, I think, 3 December, 1999, when my first dismissal was "canceled."
However, the chair of that university appeal committee, in defiance of
universal principles of appeal, wrote up the decision to mean that, as a
foreigner, I should be reviewed again. In other words, a final university
appeal is not final.
I advise you that this kind of contempt for laws in order to persecute
foreign faculty in Taiwan, specifically at National Cheng Kung University,
will seriously tarnish the reputation of all Taiwan universities and
compromise, if not undermine, academic exchanges.
It seems clear to me that a university president, its lawyers, or a few
university officials cannot dictate to the Ministry of Education, the
highest legal authority in its jurisdiction, how to interpret laws, when to
execute them, or whether to execute them at all. Such contempt for law may
seriously compromise not only the reputation of National Cheng Kung
University, but all Taiwan universities and, indeed, of the whole academic
system in Taiwan. Because if it is perceived that the Taiwan Ministry of
Education cannot exercise control and effect enforcement in a
high-definition case such as mine, where the issues are black and white, and
the case itself has achieved a public and notorious profile, it will be
rationally or justifiably assumed that no university in Taiwan is under
authorized legal regulation, thus undermining all academic accreditation in
Taiwan. Indeed, this very point was made to me by an official in the
American government familiar with the details of my case.
In light of the attached letter I received today from National Cheng
Kung University, I request that you immediately issue a formal and stern
statement to the university that, under no circumstances, can a final appeal
sanctioned by the Taiwan Ministry of Education be nullified or compromised,
or its enforcement delayed any longer. I also advise that you warn
university officials that appropriate legal penalties will be imposed if
they persist any longer in noncompliance with the law. In any case, I
assure you that I am committed to my case until its just conclusion, which
means the revival of my contract and compensation.
The university’s court date is set for, I believe, 7 March. One thing
of which I am certain is that I will not wait until then. I have no
intention of being insulted with litigation after winning my case at both
the university and Ministry levels. The Taiwan government is obligated to
enforce laws on behalf of the individual, whether a citizen or not.
Therefore, if this case is not resolved before the end of February,
with the issuance of my contract and a just financial settlement, including
full back pay, I will be compelled to appeal, yet more vigorously, to
officials in the American government, both here and at home, until the case
is resolved according to the face meaning of Taiwan laws.
I remind you that American government officials enforce laws on behalf
of Taiwan citizens. Such automatic legal enforcement not only protects
Taiwan citizens in America when subject to abuse, but, moreover, discourages
misconduct against Taiwan citizens in the first place. Knowing that human
nature is universally malicious, we cannot even imagine how many Taiwan
citizens would be victimized in America, as indeed I have been in Taiwan,
were it not for proper laws and their proper enforcement.
So I appeal, yet one more time, to the law, and specifically to the
Ministry of Education, to conclude this scandal against foreign faculty at
National Cheng Kung University. Let us make the short-term effort to
resolve this case justly in respect of the long-term benefits both to
Taiwan’s education and to Taiwan’s educational exchanges with other
countries.

Sincerely,
Professor Richard de Canio
(06) 237 8626