Education
To: moe
CC: rquinn@midway.uchicago.edu, Ray Dah-tong
CC: Scholars at Risk
Faculty Union of National Cheng Kung University
Director-General,
Ministry of Education
Department of Higher Education
10 March 2003
Dear Sir:
I am asking you once again to put an end to the travesty of “law” at
National Cheng Kung University in Tainan. At the same time, I enjoin
you to exercise leadership over that university to insure the legitimacy
of centralized and lawful government in Taiwan. Otherwise all Taiwan
universities will suffer.
National Cheng Kung’s so-called “autonomy” does not extend to
violating national laws, no more than the “autonomy” of a citizen or
other institution. National laws bind even the president of a country.
The Ministry appeal process was officially decided on 8 January
2001, when my dismissal was cancelled. All rights and benefits
pertaining to that decision must be enforced. Yet we are in our third
year since the Ministry decision and National Cheng Kung University is
still engaging in all kinds of tactical delays.
On 27 March 2001, National Cheng Kung University refused to comply
with the Ministry ruling and ignored subsequent Ministry letters dated
11 May, 14 June, 7 August, 27 August, 3 May 2002, 15 October, 2
December, and 17 January 2003.
In defiance of the Ministry ruling and subsequent letters, the
university convened further “hearings.” Later, using public (tax-paid)
money, the university filed a court action (18 January 2002), attempting
to nullify the benefits of the Ministry ruling.
In another democracy, university officials involved in this action
would be subject to severe administration, civil, and criminal
penalties. Yet NCKU officials have gone unpunished. Meanwhile, the
president of the university and chairman of the Department of Foreign
Languages and Literature, both of whom have defied the Ministry ruling,
remain in office.
On 11 October 2002, the Tainan District Court ruled that
(translated:), “until a legal dismissal, the employment relationship
between NCKU and De Canio is valid and continues.”
On 22 January 2003, faced with judicial pressure to “settle” the
case, university officials, including the Personnel Director and the
Associate Dean of Academic Affairs, attempted to “extort” an unfair
settlement, undermining the substance of the Ministry ruling by
threatening that the university could contest the case for years in the
courts.
This attempt at extortion on the part of university officials is
insulting and I said so at the meeting. Since then, the Associate Dean
of Academic Affairs has on several occasions contacted at least one
colleague in an effort to effect my resignation from the university,
against the legal substance of the Ministry ruling.
I advise the Department of Higher Education as well as the Ministry
of Education that no reputable official should perform his duties in
this manner. Even a cursory study of the history of this case
convincingly shows that there is neither observance of law nor moral
principles among many officials at National Cheng Kung University.
Defiance of the Ministry ruling is in itself sufficient to show this.
But how can a university have academic status if its officials do not
respect law and moral principles?
An official is bound to moral principles as well as laws. Besides,
as Confucius said, a gentleman does what is just, not what is expedient.
Yet, in view of the failure to punish these officials, it’s
understandable why NCKU officials continue their policy of malicious
misconduct, tactical delay, verbal equivocation, and arrogant defiance.
So I respectfully remind officials of both the Department of Higher
Education and the Ministry of Education of your responsibilities in this
case. Clearly officials at NCKU are beyond the pale of moral argument
or administrative warnings. A university has rights of autonomy only
within the bounds of the law, not in defiance of both law and moral
principle.
The benefits that legally follow from the Ministry ruling,
including contract and compensation, must be enforced. A ruling without
enforcement is verbal quibbling. Since this case started more than four
years ago, a newborn baby would be in preschool by now and a high-school
senior would be graduating from college. Is this justice? Is this law?
Although this case since my dismissal is now in its fifth year, as
recently as last week, the president’s secretary informed a member of
the Faculty Union that the university has written a letter asking the
Ministry of Education to explain the issue of “overlapping contracts.”
In view of the university’s previous tactical delays in defiance of
the law, I request the Department of Education to clarify or spell out
to the university its legal duties, including issuing a deadline of
complete compliance within no more than two weeks.
First, the university must be informed that its only legal
responsibility is to comply with the Ministry ruling according to the
letter of the law. Other issues, such as overlapping contract and
salaries are no concern of the university. The university is an
administrative entity, not a judicial or legislative agency. The other
issues concern the Ministry of Education, not NCKU.
Second, the university must compensate full salary, not only half
as has been suggested. If the university compensates only half salary,
that amounts to a punitive action against me, suggesting my dismissal
was justified or I would have received full salary. Clearly the
Ministry of Education or Department of Higher Education can resolve this
issue with a simple letter.
Third, the university must comply not only with the letter of the
law, but with the spirit of the law. This includes a formal apology and
full monetary compensation for all losses and costs incurred by this
case based on a reasonable assessment.
Fourth, as I said above, the university must be given a reasonable
deadline of no more than a few (at most three) weeks for full
compliance. Certainly the retroactive and continuing contract can be
issued within a few days, allowing two or three more weeks for other
issues to be resolved.
I hope that both the Department of Higher Education and the
Ministry of Education realize the full extent of your legal
obligations. Specifically, you are obligated to protect as well as
enforce the rights of foreign professors in Taiwan, according to Taiwan
law and in reciprocal acknowledgment of the protections Taiwan faculty
receive in other countries.
Sincerely,
Professor Richard de Canio
Department of Foreign Languages and Literature
National Cheng Kung University
Tainan, Taiwan
(06) 237 8626
No comments:
Post a Comment