11/19/2001 1:24 PM
Subject: HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSES AT NATIONAL CHENG KUNG
UNIVERSITYTo: vp@mail.oop.gov.tw
CC: raydon@ms22.hinet.net,
rquinn@uchicago.edu, yuhwen.ling@eudoramail.com
Vice-President, Annette Lu
CC: Minister of Education, Ovid Tzeng
Professor Robert Quinn, Scholars at Risk
Professor Yuh Wen-ling, Scholars at Risk
Professor Paul Chow, National Chi-Nan University
Professor Paul Chen, National Cheng Kung University
Professor Ray Dah-tong, National Cheng Kung University
Professor Robert Quinn, Scholars at Risk
Professor Yuh Wen Ling, Scholars at Risk
18 November 2001
To the Honorable Vice-President,
First, please forgive me for writing in English, my native language.
I am taking the liberty of writing because of the exceptional
circumstances of my situation.
I wish to bring to your attention rights violations at National
Cheng Kung University in Tainan, Taiwan.
National Cheng Kung University is currently involved in a dispute
with the Ministry of Education concerning the issuance of a teaching
contract to me, following an appeal decision in my favor. The Ministry
of Education has admonished the university to issue the contract, based
on principles of law, but to no avail.
In addition, university committees, in defiance of the Ministry
decision, continue to convene to "investigate" me. In light of the
Ministry decision, these committees are "legal fictions," intended to
harass and humiliate me and finally induce my resignation from the
university. By almost any legal standard, these unsanctioned
"investigations" would constitute a clear abuse of power in most
democracies.
The president of the university, Kao Chiang, claims no control over
these actions or the university's failure to issue the contract in
compliance with the Ministry ruling. This challenges belief in law at
National Cheng Kung University; for I know of no university in the
world, much less in a democracy, that can defy a legal judgment in this
way.
The university claims my appeal victory merely authorizes the
university to further investigate me. But if an appeal were not final,
it would be pointless.
The university used its full authority and resources to make a case
against me and failed. To claim it can try again until it succeeds
shows contempt for law as well as human rights. A true democracy
protects individuals from such abuses of power.
Taiwan professors are protected by laws when they teach in
democracies abroad; they are morally obligated to insure that foreign
professors in Taiwan are also protected. At stake is not only law, but
honesty; for the university participated in the appeal process but will
not honor the appeal decision.
During the more than two years that I’ve appealed this case, I have
suspended my academic career; I have spent hundreds of thousands of
dollars in living expenses, losing most of my savings; my medical
insurance has been suspended, compromising my health care; my teaching
pension from ten years of teaching at National Cheng Kung University is
threatened; and I have had to renew my visa countless times, taking
numerous trips outside of Taiwan, adding additional
expenses during a period when I have had no income. In addition,
sympathetic colleagues have dedicated countless hours to effect a
justice that university officials appear to be ignorant of, or
indifferent to, despite their tax-paid positions.
Yet, after two and a half years appealing to the law, the university
refuses to honor the law. Indeed, presumably educated officials have
repeatedly informed me either they do not know the laws or do not care
about them.
Several issues are especially puzzling here:
First, how can there be such contempt for law and human rights at a
university in a democracy such as Taiwan?
Second, how can the highest supervisory legal authority in the
country’s educational system, the Ministry of Education, tolerate such
defiance on the part of a university? How can the Minister of Education
allow himself to be subject to the legal defiance of a university
lawyer?
Presumably, the university administration is being advised by a
lawyer. If this is in fact the case, then the lawyer would be guilty of
an obstruction of justice, at least in my country. As I understand
legal principles, a lawyer cannot advise a client to defy or disobey the
law or otherwise obstruct or impede the course of justice. This is
called "obstruction of justice." Lawyers who advise obstruction of
justice are criminally prosecuted and then disbarred when convicted. In
fact, an American president was forced to resign because he advocated
obstructing justice during his presidency.
So far as I know, the Ministry of Education is the highest legal
authority in Taiwan’s education system. In addition, universal
principles of law recognize that an appeal is final. The Ministry of
Education, furthermore, has issued several warning letters for the
university to issue me the teaching contract.
Yet, presumably, the university lawyer is advising the university to
defy or impede effecting the Ministry’s legal ruling to issue me a
teaching contract. Isn’t this an obstruction of justice?
Kao Chiang, the president of the university, is, of course, also in
defiance of Taiwan law. At least, I assume he is, or what is the legal
authority of the Ministry of Education? If so, how can Kao Chiang
remain in office in defiance of Taiwan law, a law reflected in the legal
ruling of the Ministry of Education? Is there rule of law in Taiwan?
The current stalemate, nearly ten months after the Ministry of
Education appeal decision in my favor, is unacceptable. I appealed to
the Control Yuan. The Control Yuan directed its inquiry to the Ministry
of Education. The Ministry directed its inquiry to the university. The
university continues its policy of defiance and obstruction by claiming
that my lawsuit against the university "explains" or justifies the
university’s decision to suspend its response to the Ministry order to
comply with its ruling.
This kind of legal stonewalling is absurd on several levels.
The university should have routinely complied as soon as the Ministry
ruling was received. The lawsuit was filed only because the university
did not comply with the Ministry ruling and the Ministry did not enforce
its own ruling.
In what other democracy can a university defy a legal judgment with
apparent impunity from legal sanctions? In what other democracy does a
citizen have to file a lawsuit on his own behalf in order to effect a
legal ruling made by an authorized Ministry of that country?
I plead with you to effect a just and immediate resolution of this
case; and, as Vice-President of Taiwan’s democracy, to show the world
that Taiwan is indeed a nation of laws and legal rulings.
Sincerely,
Professor Richard de Canio
Department of Foreign Languages and Literature
National Cheng Kung University.
(06) 237 8626
No comments:
Post a Comment