---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Richard John <rdca25@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 4:24 PM
Subject: Human Rights in Taiwan
To: formosa@formosafoundation.org
Cc: gingrey.ga@mail.house.gov, home@fapa.org, letters@taipeitimes.com, scholarsatrisk@nyu.edu, edop@etaiwannews.com, editor@etaiwannews.com, info@chinapost.com.tw, info@taipeitimes.com, Arthur.Estopinan@mail.house.gov, Christine.DelPortillo@mail.house.gov, Joshua.Salpeter@mail.house.gov, Jay.OCallaghan@mail.house.gov, Guillermo.Vallejo@mail.house.gov, Lawrence.Raab@mail.house.gov, Sergio.Bueno@mail.house.gov, Maggie.Hernandez@mail.house.gov
FORMOSA FOUNDATION
Terri Giles, Executive Director
cc: The Honorable Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Staff Members
The Honorable Phil Gingrey, Congressional Taiwan Caucus
Scholars at Risk
Formosan Association for Public Affairs
16 June 2011
Dear Ms. Giles,
Since the Formosa Foundation "dedicates itself to the advancement of human rights" (http://www.formosafoundation.org/), I hope your foundation can assist me in a human rights issue in Taiwan.
Complete documentation of this human rights case appears on my dedicated blog at http://rdca45b.blogspot.com/.
In sum, Taiwan's fourth-ranked university, National Cheng Kung University (NCKU), in Tainan, claimed, in an illegal dismissal of an American professor, "foreigners" were not protected by Taiwan's Teachers Law. On that basis, it refused to honor an appeal ruling by the Ministry of Education (http://rdca45b.blogspot.com/search/label/Ministry%20of%20Education%20Ruling), though it attended appeal hearings in Taipei and held its own appeals at the university.
Court rulings were more arbitrative than judicial. The courts merely told the university to honor the Ministry ruling but made no deterrent, compensatory, or punitive judgments. No official was punished. How will that deter future violations, hence advance human rights, in Taiwan?
Other court rulings were also puzzling. A prosecutor said officials could not be sued for libel since their defamatory accusations only circulated inside the university. But all defamatory statutes I know state it is sufficient one other party read or hear the falsehood. I understand this is Taiwan, but it seems puzzling that university officials can spread defamation about a professor with impunity.
When I sued a student for writing a secret defamatory letter the court ruled the letter did not cause my dismissal, though it was solicited and circulated at dismissal hearings for that purpose.
No official was punished, by the courts or a government agency, though I contacted all the yuans, administrative courts, etc. In fact the Ministry of Education approved the university president, Kao Chiang, for a second three-year term even after he defied a Ministry ruling for nearly two and a half years.
Though I "won" the case, I "lost" four years of my academic career and litigation costs for unsuccessful court claims, such as compensation.
I made many costly trips abroad to renew my visa for the duration of the case. But the court ruled there was no need for me to have stayed in Taiwan. How else to contest a case in Taiwan?
Are these rulings discriminatory? It seems to me Taiwan's courts went out of their way to protect the university, while undermining rights of Americans here.
Recently the university was emboldened by a lack of deterrent rulings to post a revisionist history of my case on its web page, as if an illegal dismissal never occurred (http://rdca45b.blogspot.com/)! A Wikipedia edit (20 October 2010) made the same revisionist claim, despite Ministry and court rulings (http://rdca45b.blogspot.com/search/label/Wikipedia%20Edit).
From my experience, Taiwan's human rights and legal aid groups seem to be name tags. Not one group has helped me. Yet when NCKU students were accused of illegal file sharing, Taiwan lawyers promptly offered pro bono aid. Apparently Taiwan lawyers consider illegal file sharing a more worthy cause than the abused rights of an American citizen.
Recently a legal aid group advised me to write a letter to the AIT or President Obama. Are human rights in Taiwan the responsibility of Americans? I thought Taiwan has a voice in the US Congress on the basis of its "strong democracy."
I suspect the next legal aid group I petition will tell me to pray more. Such quietism will not advance human rights in Taiwan.
Ironically, Scholars at Risk, a human rights group then based in Chicago, thousands of miles away, responded promptly, sending two admonitory letters to the university.
Despite the claim of a "free press" here, English-language newspapers have for thirteen years ignored my pleas to expose this case. Only recently one of the three major English-language dailies interdicted publication of this case by one of its reporters with this feeble excuse:
date Mon, May 30, 2011 at 4:00 PM
subject Re: Regarding the Question of Censorship at [Name omitted] in Taiwan
Dear Sir:
To know more about your protest against the NCKU, our reporter has checked with you, the NCKU administration and the Ministry of Education (MOE).
It is our understanding that the lawsuit between you and the NCKU has been going on for thirteen years.
After discussing with our reporter, we decided to postpone our report until further developments have come out, which will make our report more newsworthy.
We can assure you that there is never any kind of censorship existed in our newspaper and we have never surrendered our journalism to any kind of power.
Best Regards
[Name omitted]
This is patent nonsense. (The complete email exchanges appear on my blog at http://rdca45b.blogspot.com/2011/06/alleged-censorship-in-english-language.html). The words "newsworthy" and "further developments" can only be Orwellian Newspeak for censorship.
What's more "newsworthy" than human rights abuses at a major Taiwan university? What "further developments" can there be other than my obituary?
With a "free press" like that, Taiwan's "human rights" are in jeopardy. Apparently whether Sean Connery marches for Taiwan independence is more "newsworthy" than human rights abuses at a high-ranked university.
The English-language newspapers here almost daily condemn human rights violations in Mainland China but ignore those at a major Taiwan university. Preaching human rights in Mainland China will not advance human rights in Taiwan.
A colleague recently published a strong letter condemning Mainland China's failure to sign the International Human Rights Charters recently endorsed by Taiwan. When I emailed him about my case he never responded.
Colleagues in this "strong democracy" remain silent, though I have made repeated appeals to them by email, with attached documentation. In thirteen years only three replied, as in the following:
Dear Prof. de Canio,
I wish I could lend my support to you. I really appreciate your effort in raising this issue up. Good luck and have a good day.
In Mainland China they stand up to tanks; in Taiwan they won't stand up to a university official. My judgment is not unique, as the article, "Silence of the Lambs," cited in the Taipei Times, shows (http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/front/archives/2009/06/13/2003446067).
There seems little sense of democratic principles here. One official who contested my illegal dismissal when a member of NCKU's Teachers Union now, as an administrative official, pretends, on the NCKU web page, an illegal dismissal never occurred!
But as Taiwan President Ma Ying-jeou said about the Tiananmen Square crackdown, pretending it didn't happen is not an option (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31099087/ns/world_news-asia_pacific/t/police-deter-dissent-tiananmen-anniversary/).
Sincerely,
Richard de Canio
formerly, Associate Professor
Department of Foreign Languages and Literature
National Cheng Kung University
Tainan, Taiwan
From: Richard John <rdca25@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 4:24 PM
Subject: Human Rights in Taiwan
To: formosa@formosafoundation.org
Cc: gingrey.ga@mail.house.gov, home@fapa.org, letters@taipeitimes.com, scholarsatrisk@nyu.edu, edop@etaiwannews.com, editor@etaiwannews.com, info@chinapost.com.tw, info@taipeitimes.com, Arthur.Estopinan@mail.house.gov, Christine.DelPortillo@mail.house.gov, Joshua.Salpeter@mail.house.gov, Jay.OCallaghan@mail.house.gov, Guillermo.Vallejo@mail.house.gov, Lawrence.Raab@mail.house.gov, Sergio.Bueno@mail.house.gov, Maggie.Hernandez@mail.house.gov
FORMOSA FOUNDATION
Terri Giles, Executive Director
cc: The Honorable Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Staff Members
The Honorable Phil Gingrey, Congressional Taiwan Caucus
Scholars at Risk
Formosan Association for Public Affairs
16 June 2011
Dear Ms. Giles,
Since the Formosa Foundation "dedicates itself to the advancement of human rights" (http://www.formosafoundation.org/), I hope your foundation can assist me in a human rights issue in Taiwan.
Complete documentation of this human rights case appears on my dedicated blog at http://rdca45b.blogspot.com/.
In sum, Taiwan's fourth-ranked university, National Cheng Kung University (NCKU), in Tainan, claimed, in an illegal dismissal of an American professor, "foreigners" were not protected by Taiwan's Teachers Law. On that basis, it refused to honor an appeal ruling by the Ministry of Education (http://rdca45b.blogspot.com/search/label/Ministry%20of%20Education%20Ruling), though it attended appeal hearings in Taipei and held its own appeals at the university.
Court rulings were more arbitrative than judicial. The courts merely told the university to honor the Ministry ruling but made no deterrent, compensatory, or punitive judgments. No official was punished. How will that deter future violations, hence advance human rights, in Taiwan?
Other court rulings were also puzzling. A prosecutor said officials could not be sued for libel since their defamatory accusations only circulated inside the university. But all defamatory statutes I know state it is sufficient one other party read or hear the falsehood. I understand this is Taiwan, but it seems puzzling that university officials can spread defamation about a professor with impunity.
When I sued a student for writing a secret defamatory letter the court ruled the letter did not cause my dismissal, though it was solicited and circulated at dismissal hearings for that purpose.
No official was punished, by the courts or a government agency, though I contacted all the yuans, administrative courts, etc. In fact the Ministry of Education approved the university president, Kao Chiang, for a second three-year term even after he defied a Ministry ruling for nearly two and a half years.
Though I "won" the case, I "lost" four years of my academic career and litigation costs for unsuccessful court claims, such as compensation.
I made many costly trips abroad to renew my visa for the duration of the case. But the court ruled there was no need for me to have stayed in Taiwan. How else to contest a case in Taiwan?
Are these rulings discriminatory? It seems to me Taiwan's courts went out of their way to protect the university, while undermining rights of Americans here.
Recently the university was emboldened by a lack of deterrent rulings to post a revisionist history of my case on its web page, as if an illegal dismissal never occurred (http://rdca45b.blogspot.com/)! A Wikipedia edit (20 October 2010) made the same revisionist claim, despite Ministry and court rulings (http://rdca45b.blogspot.com/search/label/Wikipedia%20Edit).
From my experience, Taiwan's human rights and legal aid groups seem to be name tags. Not one group has helped me. Yet when NCKU students were accused of illegal file sharing, Taiwan lawyers promptly offered pro bono aid. Apparently Taiwan lawyers consider illegal file sharing a more worthy cause than the abused rights of an American citizen.
Recently a legal aid group advised me to write a letter to the AIT or President Obama. Are human rights in Taiwan the responsibility of Americans? I thought Taiwan has a voice in the US Congress on the basis of its "strong democracy."
I suspect the next legal aid group I petition will tell me to pray more. Such quietism will not advance human rights in Taiwan.
Ironically, Scholars at Risk, a human rights group then based in Chicago, thousands of miles away, responded promptly, sending two admonitory letters to the university.
Despite the claim of a "free press" here, English-language newspapers have for thirteen years ignored my pleas to expose this case. Only recently one of the three major English-language dailies interdicted publication of this case by one of its reporters with this feeble excuse:
date Mon, May 30, 2011 at 4:00 PM
subject Re: Regarding the Question of Censorship at [Name omitted] in Taiwan
Dear Sir:
To know more about your protest against the NCKU, our reporter has checked with you, the NCKU administration and the Ministry of Education (MOE).
It is our understanding that the lawsuit between you and the NCKU has been going on for thirteen years.
After discussing with our reporter, we decided to postpone our report until further developments have come out, which will make our report more newsworthy.
We can assure you that there is never any kind of censorship existed in our newspaper and we have never surrendered our journalism to any kind of power.
Best Regards
[Name omitted]
This is patent nonsense. (The complete email exchanges appear on my blog at http://rdca45b.blogspot.com/2011/06/alleged-censorship-in-english-language.html). The words "newsworthy" and "further developments" can only be Orwellian Newspeak for censorship.
What's more "newsworthy" than human rights abuses at a major Taiwan university? What "further developments" can there be other than my obituary?
With a "free press" like that, Taiwan's "human rights" are in jeopardy. Apparently whether Sean Connery marches for Taiwan independence is more "newsworthy" than human rights abuses at a high-ranked university.
The English-language newspapers here almost daily condemn human rights violations in Mainland China but ignore those at a major Taiwan university. Preaching human rights in Mainland China will not advance human rights in Taiwan.
A colleague recently published a strong letter condemning Mainland China's failure to sign the International Human Rights Charters recently endorsed by Taiwan. When I emailed him about my case he never responded.
Colleagues in this "strong democracy" remain silent, though I have made repeated appeals to them by email, with attached documentation. In thirteen years only three replied, as in the following:
Dear Prof. de Canio,
I wish I could lend my support to you. I really appreciate your effort in raising this issue up. Good luck and have a good day.
In Mainland China they stand up to tanks; in Taiwan they won't stand up to a university official. My judgment is not unique, as the article, "Silence of the Lambs," cited in the Taipei Times, shows (http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/front/archives/2009/06/13/2003446067).
There seems little sense of democratic principles here. One official who contested my illegal dismissal when a member of NCKU's Teachers Union now, as an administrative official, pretends, on the NCKU web page, an illegal dismissal never occurred!
But as Taiwan President Ma Ying-jeou said about the Tiananmen Square crackdown, pretending it didn't happen is not an option (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31099087/ns/world_news-asia_pacific/t/police-deter-dissent-tiananmen-anniversary/).
Sincerely,
Richard de Canio
formerly, Associate Professor
Department of Foreign Languages and Literature
National Cheng Kung University
Tainan, Taiwan
No comments:
Post a Comment