-------- Original Message -------- Subject: Letter to Professor Chih-Chieh Chou Concerning Human Rights Abuses at National Cheng Kung University
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2010 21:06:03 +0800
From: rdca25@gmail.com
To: ccchou@mail.ncku.edu.tw
Professor Chih-Chieh Chou
Department of Political Science,
Graduate Institute of Political Economy,
College of Social Sciences,
National Cheng Kung University
Tainan, Taiwan
27 July 2010
Dear Professor Chou,
I recently came across your article in the university's Research Express (Volume 12, Issue 9; February 26, 2010, online at http://research.ncku.edu.tw/re/commentary/e/20100226/1.html).
You begin by lauding Human Rights Day, 2009, citing "the Universal Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights," then adding,
From now on, the citizens can resort to the articles of the Covenants to plea for compensation once they assume their rights and interests are deprived through laws violating the Covenants, which makes Taiwan the only Chinese society with comprehensive human rights framework around the globe. Such accomplishment is way ahead of China while they celebrate their 60th anniversary and brag about their wealth and strong national defense power (p. 1). (My emphasis.)
You refer "to the protection and installation of civilian economic and social rights," and, listing "practical rights issues," you conclude, contrasting China and Taiwan by stating that "Taiwan’s only competitive edge in interaction is the prevalent installation of these humanitarian values. Taiwan should seize the opportunity to demonstrate our Chinese human rights experience and its content to the international community!" (my emphasis).
I applaud your concern over human rights in China. But I'm curious why you are so concerned about enforcing human rights in China when there are egregious human rights at our own university that you can help to enforce too.
You are a professor at our university, so you should be aware that in 1999 I was illegally dismissed from the Department at Foreign Languages and Literature at our very university. A secret letter was circulated at several "oversight" committees, presumably to insure my dismissal when it became apparent the original accusations against me were invalid. I should add I wasn't even aware of those accusations until after the dismissal hearing, and then only by hearsay.
My dismissal, egregiously in violation of basic human rights protections, nonetheless passed all "oversight" committees at our university. For obvious reasons it was overturned by the Ministry of Education on appeal in a ruling dated 8 January 2001. In pedagogic style, the ruling highlighted human rights abuses, presumably to insure NCKU officials would not repeat the same mistakes.
However at our university even a legal Ministry ruling is not sufficient to guarantee human rights enforcement. Then what is the purpose of a Ministry appeal? I have no idea how our colleagues would answer that question if they felt compelled to.
Subsequently, university president, Kao Chiang, refused to enforce that Ministry ruling for nearly two and a half years (attachment), even after an international human rights group, Scholars at Risk, queried him about the delay (see attachments). Only after repeated pressure from the Ministry of Education (attachment) did the university finally comply with a legal Ministry ruling. Even then the university tried to impose penalties against me, despite the Ministry ruling; as if I never won the case.
However, before the university finally complied it argued foreign faculty are not protected by the Teacher's Law. Hence, even after the dismissal action against me was canceled, in December, 1999 after an eight-month delay (I remind you, I had to renew my visa every two months), I was informed I had to be "reviewed" again, since the case was now being treated not as a firing action but as a hiring action. Can you follow the logic here?
American professors, you see, are not protected by the Teacher's Law, the same law that protects you, or the principle of equality under the law that protected you as a student in New York (SUNY).
(The university actually went to court to prove this, apparently unconcerned about saying so in public; yet NCKU has been called the fourth-ranked university in Taiwan.)
Now since it was the case (as the university argued) that the dismissal action was really a hiring action, even though the university's dismissal action could not pass the university committee I could lose my job anyway, for now it was an issue not of me being fired illegally but just of me not being hired, presumably on legal criteria. So, you see, semantics and human rights don't make good bedfellows.
I'm curious, Professor Chou. According to our (NCKU) web site, you received your degree at the State University of New York (SUNY) at Buffalo. Did that New York university ever tell Taiwanese professors they were not protected by the same laws that protect American professors? If not, we have a human rights problem in Taiwan. Isn't that so?
Now NCKU university held appeal hearings here. The university also sent representatives to appeal hearings at the Ministry of Education in Taipei. At no time did the university ever argue that Americans had no right to appeal. It would have been against the law as it's understood here anyway, although our officials have a different understanding of the law (attachment).
But laws are beside the point now. I'm arguing fundamental honesty now, not law. Because after I won the Ministry of Education appeal the university then argued that, as a foreign teacher I had no right to appeal in the first place.
I'm curious, Professor Chou, since your department is Political Science, and your specialties, according to our web page, include "Human Rights" and "Political Change," how is it possible for the university to hold appeal hearings, and even attend them in Taiwan, if, indeed, I had no right to appeal in the first place? Can you explain this legal conundrum to me, since my department is Foreign Languages and Literature and I'm relatively unenlightened about political science.
But let me sum up the issues here for clarity. The university itself held appeal hearings, which involved numerous committee meetings in a three-tiered process, including department, college, and university committees. These "oversight" committees repeatedly passed my dismissal, before and even after the Ministry overturned it.
The university also debated the case at the Ministry of Education in Taipei. Yet after the university lost it argued I had no right to appeal.
This of course would be rejected in an American court based on the legal principle known as estoppel. Let me quote Wikipedia on this term:
Estoppel in its broadest sense is a legal term referring to a series of legal and equitable doctrines that preclude "a person from denying or asserting anything to the contrary of that which has, in contemplation of law, been established as the truth, either by the acts of judicial or legislative officers, or by his own deed, acts, or representations, either express or implied."
But this is a legal principle. There's the deeper moral principle whose violation is even more audacious, since one does not expect officials of a university that is commonly called a prestige university in Taiwan to behave in such a duplicitous manner, more like children in a school yard who want to win a fight by whatever means than as accredited professors and honorable officials, especially since many professors here, like yourself, were accredited in the United States and were treated equitably while matriculated at universities or teaching there.
Because of the serious human rights issues involved, I will fight this case no matter how long it takes. I have even opened a web site to that purpose.
But in the meantime it worries me that every time someone googles for "human rights" and "Taiwan" they will find, not details about egregious human rights violations at National Cheng Kung University in Taiwan (although with my blog I hope to correct this problem) but the words of your article pleading to "Make Human Rights Work in Mainland China through Cross-Strait Dialogue."
With all due respect, Professor Chou, although I applaud your concern over human rights in Mainland China, isn't it of more immediate concern to make sure that human rights work in Taiwan, specifically at our own university, first?
Not only are you the author of that article in Research Express (previously published in United Daily), but the editorial staff of Research Express includes our current university president, Michael M. C. Lai, Senior Executive Vice President Da Hsuan Feng, and Senior Executive Vice President Hwung-Hweng Hwung. Yet I have repeatedly petitioned President Lai and other officials here to resolve this outstanding human rights case, to no avail.
In the 1960s there was a slogan, THINK GLOBALLY, ACT LOCALLY. Although I applaud your thinking globally about human rights issues, I really think you should act locally too.
Your well-meaning article reminds me of another saying, this one by Edmund Burke, that "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."
I will give my colleagues the benefit of the doubt and assume those not directly involved in my illegal dismissal or in the enforcement of that dismissal are "good" men and women. But by doing nothing about this case, the evidence of which is fully documented (and only partly represented in my attachment) you are not insuring (to quote from your article) "the protection and installation of civilian economic and social rights" in Taiwan.
To paraphrase the final line of your essay, I modestly ask that you "seize the opportunity to demonstrate our Chinese human rights experience and its content to the international community!" by enforcing human rights at our university. This can be done by insuring a formal apology and compensation from National Cheng Kung University over its human rights abuses. If human rights can't be enforced here they certainly won't be enforced in Mainland China, no matter how many articles you publish.
Sincerely,
Richard de Canio
Department of Foreign Languages and Literature
National Cheng Kung University
Tainan, Taiwan
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
Wednesday, July 7, 2010
Letter to the American Congress
date Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 10:39 AM
subject Human rights abuses in Taiwan
The Honorable Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Staff Members
The Honorable Phil Gingrey, Congressional Taiwan Caucus
cc: The Taiwan Ministry of Education
Scholars at Risk
7 July 2011
Dear Honorable Members of Congress,
I wish to report to the American Congress that the rights of American citizens are in jeopardy in Taiwan. Despite its claim to being a "democracy" and even, in the words of members of the American Congress, a "strong democracy," in fact democratic process is not practiced in Taiwan when the rights of an American citizen are involved.
In 1999 I was illegally dismissed from National Cheng Kung University in Tainan, Taiwan. Despite winning an appeal at Taiwan's Ministry of Education in January 2001, the university defied that ruling until May 2003 and even claimed, after losing the appeal, that Americans had no right to appeal, since we are only "foreigners" in Taiwan.
These are the same Taiwanese who expect Americans and our representatives in the US Congress to stand up for Taiwan's "democracy" and even risk war doing so. But the Taiwan government will not enforce those same principles on behalf of an American citizen. Presumably the "face" of a Taiwan official is worth more than the rights of an American citizen.
This is not merely an administrative issue. Despite numerous petitions to them, NCKU's faculty have been completely silent during this ordeal. These are the same professors who matriculate at American universities and enjoy rights and privileges guaranteed to all under the American Constitution. These are the same professors who present at international conferences boasting of Taiwan's democratic principles, principles not enforced on behalf of American citizens. Is this blatant and shameless racism?
Since my illegal dismissal in 1999, Taiwan's government has done nothing to protect my rights apart from canceling my dismissal. It allowed the university to delay reinstatement for nearly two and a half years. It has not punished a single official. Taiwan's courts punished no one. The courts did not even award compensation or damages, despite the four-year interruption to my academic career and loss to my reputation.
Taiwan's Control Yuan and other government agencies have ignored my many petitions. Taiwan's Ministry of Education seems to be taking the side of the university that, since I was reinstated, the case is closed. I suppose, in Taiwan, if a rapist gives an American woman her clothes back the case is closed.
The lack of deterrent rulings has emboldened NCKU officials to "explain" on the NCKU web page as recently as March and May of 2011, that an illegal dismissal never occurred; in fact, that I was "involved" in misconduct that justified dismissal. These posts were signed by NCKU's Secretary-General and president, apparently without fear of penalty by the Ministry of Education.
The so-called "free press" in Taiwan has published only a couple of small items about the case, taking no sides. The English-language press has ignored the case completely. When one conscientious reporter reared in Hong Kong recently showed interest in the case he was interdicted by the editor who informed me he was awaiting "further developments." It reminds me of a Bob Dylan refrain. How much injustice must occur in Taiwan before the English-language press here reports it?
One wonders how many similar cases have been censored by Taiwan's "free press," which is more concerned with berating Mainland China over human rights abuses than exposing human rights abuses in Taiwan. That's good public relations (presumably Taiwan's English-language press is read by members of the US Congress), but poor democracy. No wonder the US Congress has called Taiwan a "strong democracy."
Recently Yahoo News posted the following (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110625/ap_on_re_as/as_taiwan_china):
"Lawmaker Wu Yu-sheng of the ruling Nationalist Party proposed late Friday that the legislature open its floor to the visiting Chinese because 'out of all places in Taiwan, the legislature is where democracy is most thoroughly implemented.'"
This is well and good, but not if the Taiwan legislature is the only place where democracy is "thoroughly implemented." Laws that are legislated but not practiced are worse than no laws at all because that undermines confidence in the very principle of law.
In another quote it's reported that,
"They were surprised that our lawmakers could question and even shout at senior government officials," the report said.
But questioning and shouting at senior government officials is useless unless officials respond. I have been questioning and petitioning Taiwan's government officials for thirteen years, to no avail. As recently as this week a Chinese colleague and I made phone calls to the Ministry of Education and given the usual runaround. Like Hotspur's sarcastic boast in a Shakespeare play, I can call dead spirits from the vasty deep--but will they come?
In Taiwan anyone can report to the "free press." But will it be published? In Taiwan, anyone can freely petition government officials--but will they act? Such equivocal indulgence of democratic rights is an insidious way to destroy those rights without risk to one's status as a "democracy."
Despite Taiwan's "strong democracy," since I cannot obtain justice in Taiwan, I am appealing to members of the American Congress, specifically members of the Taiwan Caucus, to pressure Taiwan's government to enforce democratic principles on behalf of an American citizen, in the same way that the American justice system enforces justice on behalf of Taiwan's citizens who reside in the US.
At the same time, since the Formosa Foundation "dedicates itself to the advancement of human rights" (http://www.formosafoundation.org/), I hope that foundation can explain to the American Congress how human rights are being advanced in Taiwan by the Taiwan government's handling of my case, the facts of which are attached and posted on my blog at http://rdca45b.blogspot.com/. I am also circulating this email to "human rights" groups in Taiwan that thus far have ignored my petitions for assistance.
Sincerely,
Richard de Canio
Formerly, Associate Professor
National Cheng Kung University
Tainan, Taiwan
(06) 237 8626
subject Human rights abuses in Taiwan
The Honorable Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Staff Members
The Honorable Phil Gingrey, Congressional Taiwan Caucus
cc: The Taiwan Ministry of Education
Scholars at Risk
7 July 2011
Dear Honorable Members of Congress,
I wish to report to the American Congress that the rights of American citizens are in jeopardy in Taiwan. Despite its claim to being a "democracy" and even, in the words of members of the American Congress, a "strong democracy," in fact democratic process is not practiced in Taiwan when the rights of an American citizen are involved.
In 1999 I was illegally dismissed from National Cheng Kung University in Tainan, Taiwan. Despite winning an appeal at Taiwan's Ministry of Education in January 2001, the university defied that ruling until May 2003 and even claimed, after losing the appeal, that Americans had no right to appeal, since we are only "foreigners" in Taiwan.
These are the same Taiwanese who expect Americans and our representatives in the US Congress to stand up for Taiwan's "democracy" and even risk war doing so. But the Taiwan government will not enforce those same principles on behalf of an American citizen. Presumably the "face" of a Taiwan official is worth more than the rights of an American citizen.
This is not merely an administrative issue. Despite numerous petitions to them, NCKU's faculty have been completely silent during this ordeal. These are the same professors who matriculate at American universities and enjoy rights and privileges guaranteed to all under the American Constitution. These are the same professors who present at international conferences boasting of Taiwan's democratic principles, principles not enforced on behalf of American citizens. Is this blatant and shameless racism?
Since my illegal dismissal in 1999, Taiwan's government has done nothing to protect my rights apart from canceling my dismissal. It allowed the university to delay reinstatement for nearly two and a half years. It has not punished a single official. Taiwan's courts punished no one. The courts did not even award compensation or damages, despite the four-year interruption to my academic career and loss to my reputation.
Taiwan's Control Yuan and other government agencies have ignored my many petitions. Taiwan's Ministry of Education seems to be taking the side of the university that, since I was reinstated, the case is closed. I suppose, in Taiwan, if a rapist gives an American woman her clothes back the case is closed.
The lack of deterrent rulings has emboldened NCKU officials to "explain" on the NCKU web page as recently as March and May of 2011, that an illegal dismissal never occurred; in fact, that I was "involved" in misconduct that justified dismissal. These posts were signed by NCKU's Secretary-General and president, apparently without fear of penalty by the Ministry of Education.
The so-called "free press" in Taiwan has published only a couple of small items about the case, taking no sides. The English-language press has ignored the case completely. When one conscientious reporter reared in Hong Kong recently showed interest in the case he was interdicted by the editor who informed me he was awaiting "further developments." It reminds me of a Bob Dylan refrain. How much injustice must occur in Taiwan before the English-language press here reports it?
One wonders how many similar cases have been censored by Taiwan's "free press," which is more concerned with berating Mainland China over human rights abuses than exposing human rights abuses in Taiwan. That's good public relations (presumably Taiwan's English-language press is read by members of the US Congress), but poor democracy. No wonder the US Congress has called Taiwan a "strong democracy."
Recently Yahoo News posted the following (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110625/ap_on_re_as/as_taiwan_china):
"Lawmaker Wu Yu-sheng of the ruling Nationalist Party proposed late Friday that the legislature open its floor to the visiting Chinese because 'out of all places in Taiwan, the legislature is where democracy is most thoroughly implemented.'"
This is well and good, but not if the Taiwan legislature is the only place where democracy is "thoroughly implemented." Laws that are legislated but not practiced are worse than no laws at all because that undermines confidence in the very principle of law.
In another quote it's reported that,
"They were surprised that our lawmakers could question and even shout at senior government officials," the report said.
But questioning and shouting at senior government officials is useless unless officials respond. I have been questioning and petitioning Taiwan's government officials for thirteen years, to no avail. As recently as this week a Chinese colleague and I made phone calls to the Ministry of Education and given the usual runaround. Like Hotspur's sarcastic boast in a Shakespeare play, I can call dead spirits from the vasty deep--but will they come?
In Taiwan anyone can report to the "free press." But will it be published? In Taiwan, anyone can freely petition government officials--but will they act? Such equivocal indulgence of democratic rights is an insidious way to destroy those rights without risk to one's status as a "democracy."
Despite Taiwan's "strong democracy," since I cannot obtain justice in Taiwan, I am appealing to members of the American Congress, specifically members of the Taiwan Caucus, to pressure Taiwan's government to enforce democratic principles on behalf of an American citizen, in the same way that the American justice system enforces justice on behalf of Taiwan's citizens who reside in the US.
At the same time, since the Formosa Foundation "dedicates itself to the advancement of human rights" (http://www.formosafoundation.org/), I hope that foundation can explain to the American Congress how human rights are being advanced in Taiwan by the Taiwan government's handling of my case, the facts of which are attached and posted on my blog at http://rdca45b.blogspot.com/. I am also circulating this email to "human rights" groups in Taiwan that thus far have ignored my petitions for assistance.
Sincerely,
Richard de Canio
Formerly, Associate Professor
National Cheng Kung University
Tainan, Taiwan
(06) 237 8626
Monday, July 5, 2010
Letter to Ministry of Education (5 July 2011)
The Ministry of Education
Taipei, Taiwan
cc: Scholars at Risk
Formosa Foundation
Taiwan "human rights" groups
Center for Taiwan International Relations
US Taiwan Caucus
North America Taiwanese Professors' Association (NATPA)
American Universities, etc.
5 July 2011
Please allow me to inform those concerned about human rights, and, specifically, human rights in Taiwan, that, over thirteen years, I have tried everything possible to resolve human rights issues at National Cheng Kung University in Tainan, Taiwan, to no avail.
I have respectfully contacted every agency in Taiwan. I have contacted Taiwan presidents and vice-presidents. I have contacted the (now defunct?) Human Rights Commission. I have contacted the Control Yuan and petitioned that "prestigious" agency personally in Taipei, to no avail. I have sent repeated postal and electronic mails to Taiwan presidents, premiers, human rights groups, legal aid groups, and Taiwan's Department of Higher Education, to no avail.
I have also sent numerous letters to the three major English-language newspapers in Taiwan, including the China Post, Taipei Times, and Taiwan News to no avail. Meanwhile they condemn human rights abuses in Mainland China.
To my knowledge, not a single letter of mine about this case has been published. The single reply I received, about a month ago, said the editor was awaiting "further developments" in a case that has lasted thirteen years. I'm not sure what "further developments" means, unless it's Sean Connery marching for Taiwan independence.
The Ministry of Education, presumably an oversight agency of Taiwan's public universities, has so far been unable to resolve this issue. Yet the Ministry itself has fully documented abuses in its ruling of 2001, which canceled my dismissal (attached). Moreover, NCKU defied that ruling for nearly two and a half years.
In the meantime the Ministry sent ten warning letters, in which it spelled out human rights abuses (attached). But the MOE has not punished a single university official. In fact the university president who defied the MOE ruling was afterwards approved for a second three-year term.
The courts awarded no punitive damages. But my academic career was interrupted for at least four years and libelous accusations about me were circulated at university hearings. As recently as last year (2010), students assured me those accusations were current at the university (attached).
But no Taiwan court found a single university official liable. The courts didn't even award compensation for expenses incurred by my dismissal.
Are these deterrent rulings? Is this the way to insure a "strong democracy," based on law and legal rights principles? If a child is kidnapped will a Taiwan court merely enforce the return of the child without making exemplary punitive, deterrent, and compensatory rulings?
To add insult to injury, the university president and his Secretary-General recently posted on the official NCKU web page an "explanation" of the illegal dismissal as if no laws were violated, even suggesting I was "involved" in misconduct that justified dismissal. Yet the Secretary-General himself contested the dismissal as illegal before he became Secretary-General! Are right and wrong opportunistic concepts in Taiwan instead of fundamental principles of justice?
NCKU faculty have not raised their voices in protest. Many matriculated at universities in democracies abroad where they enjoyed human rights protections.
If my case is typical, Taiwan is not a "strong democracy" but a "virtual democracy." Rights are virtually guaranteed but not actually enforced.
In a chimerical democracy, citizens are free to file formal complaints, while government agencies are free to ignore them. With this chimerical or virtual freedom, citizens are not motivated to fight for a more tangible freedom.
Ironically, under the coercive government of Mainland China, citizens stand up to tanks. Under the permissive government of Taiwan, citizens won't stand up to a university administration.
With no freedom of the press in Mainland China, citizens use all means to expose human rights abuses. But the "free press" in Taiwan will not expose this case, looking for "further developments." How many similar abuses are there that haven't been exposed?
Based on the history of human rights abuses at National Cheng Kung University, and the Ministry of Education's refusal to enforce remedy of those abuses, I must petition American universities to respond appropriately and terminate academic exchanges with Taiwan universities.
Apart from the right of an American citizen to be protected under Taiwan law, if human rights are not enforced how can academic standards be assured? No professor will protest abuses at a university and risk dismissal with no tangible means of remedy or compensation, as happened in my case.
In the meantime, I am asking the Ministry of Education one more time to insure immediate and formal remedy of this long-standing case at National Cheng Kung University. Pending this, I have other legal and petitionary options available, and I intend to use them.
Sincerely,
Richard de Canio
formerly Associate Professor
Department of Foreign Languages and Literature
National Cheng Kung University
Tainan, Taiwan
For those who wish to explore this case further, please consult my blog at http://rdca45b.blogspot.com/
Taipei, Taiwan
cc: Scholars at Risk
Formosa Foundation
Taiwan "human rights" groups
Center for Taiwan International Relations
US Taiwan Caucus
North America Taiwanese Professors' Association (NATPA)
American Universities, etc.
5 July 2011
Please allow me to inform those concerned about human rights, and, specifically, human rights in Taiwan, that, over thirteen years, I have tried everything possible to resolve human rights issues at National Cheng Kung University in Tainan, Taiwan, to no avail.
I have respectfully contacted every agency in Taiwan. I have contacted Taiwan presidents and vice-presidents. I have contacted the (now defunct?) Human Rights Commission. I have contacted the Control Yuan and petitioned that "prestigious" agency personally in Taipei, to no avail. I have sent repeated postal and electronic mails to Taiwan presidents, premiers, human rights groups, legal aid groups, and Taiwan's Department of Higher Education, to no avail.
I have also sent numerous letters to the three major English-language newspapers in Taiwan, including the China Post, Taipei Times, and Taiwan News to no avail. Meanwhile they condemn human rights abuses in Mainland China.
To my knowledge, not a single letter of mine about this case has been published. The single reply I received, about a month ago, said the editor was awaiting "further developments" in a case that has lasted thirteen years. I'm not sure what "further developments" means, unless it's Sean Connery marching for Taiwan independence.
The Ministry of Education, presumably an oversight agency of Taiwan's public universities, has so far been unable to resolve this issue. Yet the Ministry itself has fully documented abuses in its ruling of 2001, which canceled my dismissal (attached). Moreover, NCKU defied that ruling for nearly two and a half years.
In the meantime the Ministry sent ten warning letters, in which it spelled out human rights abuses (attached). But the MOE has not punished a single university official. In fact the university president who defied the MOE ruling was afterwards approved for a second three-year term.
The courts awarded no punitive damages. But my academic career was interrupted for at least four years and libelous accusations about me were circulated at university hearings. As recently as last year (2010), students assured me those accusations were current at the university (attached).
But no Taiwan court found a single university official liable. The courts didn't even award compensation for expenses incurred by my dismissal.
Are these deterrent rulings? Is this the way to insure a "strong democracy," based on law and legal rights principles? If a child is kidnapped will a Taiwan court merely enforce the return of the child without making exemplary punitive, deterrent, and compensatory rulings?
To add insult to injury, the university president and his Secretary-General recently posted on the official NCKU web page an "explanation" of the illegal dismissal as if no laws were violated, even suggesting I was "involved" in misconduct that justified dismissal. Yet the Secretary-General himself contested the dismissal as illegal before he became Secretary-General! Are right and wrong opportunistic concepts in Taiwan instead of fundamental principles of justice?
NCKU faculty have not raised their voices in protest. Many matriculated at universities in democracies abroad where they enjoyed human rights protections.
If my case is typical, Taiwan is not a "strong democracy" but a "virtual democracy." Rights are virtually guaranteed but not actually enforced.
In a chimerical democracy, citizens are free to file formal complaints, while government agencies are free to ignore them. With this chimerical or virtual freedom, citizens are not motivated to fight for a more tangible freedom.
Ironically, under the coercive government of Mainland China, citizens stand up to tanks. Under the permissive government of Taiwan, citizens won't stand up to a university administration.
With no freedom of the press in Mainland China, citizens use all means to expose human rights abuses. But the "free press" in Taiwan will not expose this case, looking for "further developments." How many similar abuses are there that haven't been exposed?
Based on the history of human rights abuses at National Cheng Kung University, and the Ministry of Education's refusal to enforce remedy of those abuses, I must petition American universities to respond appropriately and terminate academic exchanges with Taiwan universities.
Apart from the right of an American citizen to be protected under Taiwan law, if human rights are not enforced how can academic standards be assured? No professor will protest abuses at a university and risk dismissal with no tangible means of remedy or compensation, as happened in my case.
In the meantime, I am asking the Ministry of Education one more time to insure immediate and formal remedy of this long-standing case at National Cheng Kung University. Pending this, I have other legal and petitionary options available, and I intend to use them.
Sincerely,
Richard de Canio
formerly Associate Professor
Department of Foreign Languages and Literature
National Cheng Kung University
Tainan, Taiwan
For those who wish to explore this case further, please consult my blog at http://rdca45b.blogspot.com/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)