I came across a very enlightening editorial in the Nov. 7 Taipei Times newspaper about the Taiwanese judiciary's recent ruling that the mother of a wrongly convicted and executed young serviceman would receive $3.4 million in compensation for the loss of her son. While highlighting several troubling aspects of this case, author Lin Feng-jeng aptly points out the Taiwanese judiciary's and government's penchant for claiming that everything they do is "done according to the law."
According to the faulty logic of this oft-used excuse in Taiwan, the young man's confession under torture and duress, his execution, the lack of punishment for those guilty of violating his human and legal rights and for orchestrating his conviction and execution, were all handled "according to the law."
In my case, I was also told numerous times by the judge, prosecutor's and staff at the prosecutor's office, and even by some lawyers, that everything about my case was being handled "according to the law." In fact, my last lawyer, in a fit of anger while we were arguing about how poorly my case was being handled by the court and how much my legal and human rights were being violated, told me point-blank that "The truth didn't matter." He went on to explain that in Taiwan's courts, what judges care about is "who has the evidence" that the judge deems relevant according to his own thinking. Put simply, the parties in court are at the whims, fancies and biases of the particular judge, and whoever is lucky enough to be in the judge's favor will win the case!
Read the editorial for more about how the law, judiciary and government handle legal and human rights in Taiwan: Vote For a Legal System That Is Just
According to the faulty logic of this oft-used excuse in Taiwan, the young man's confession under torture and duress, his execution, the lack of punishment for those guilty of violating his human and legal rights and for orchestrating his conviction and execution, were all handled "according to the law."
In my case, I was also told numerous times by the judge, prosecutor's and staff at the prosecutor's office, and even by some lawyers, that everything about my case was being handled "according to the law." In fact, my last lawyer, in a fit of anger while we were arguing about how poorly my case was being handled by the court and how much my legal and human rights were being violated, told me point-blank that "The truth didn't matter." He went on to explain that in Taiwan's courts, what judges care about is "who has the evidence" that the judge deems relevant according to his own thinking. Put simply, the parties in court are at the whims, fancies and biases of the particular judge, and whoever is lucky enough to be in the judge's favor will win the case!
Read the editorial for more about how the law, judiciary and government handle legal and human rights in Taiwan: Vote For a Legal System That Is Just
No comments:
Post a Comment