Taipei, Taiwan
23 August 2011
Dear Ministry of Education,
Your failure to fully redress my illegal dismissal in 1999 up to the present day places American professors in jeopardy in Taiwan. In a just society, university officials cannot deny an illegal dismissal proved in official documents, such as a Ministry ruling.
In today's news occurs an item about former attorney general and Governor of New York Eliot Spitzer who, according to the cited news item, implied that a William Gilman was guilty of wrongdoing though he was acquitted by a court:
"Gilman was found guilty in February 2008 on a felony antitrust charge, but the presiding judge threw out that conviction in July 2010, citing new evidence."
Mr. Spitzer is now the subject of a civil lawsuit on the following grounds:
"Mr. Spitzer was well aware of his own allegations as attorney general and the resolution of those allegations in favor of Mr. Gilman and yet, recklessly disregarded these facts," the complaint said.
Gilman is seeking at least $10 million of compensatory damages; $20 million of general damages, including damage to his reputation; and $30 million of punitive damages. (See http://news.yahoo.com/spitzer-faces-60-million-libel-suit-over-slate-135409113.html)
http://news.secr.ncku.edu.tw/files/13-1054-78481-1.php), current National Cheng Kung University Secretary-General, Chin-Cheng Chen makes the following claim (emphasis mine):
Moreover, in view of the fact that the work authored by Associate Professor De Canio was involved in plagiarism and sold in public which went in violation of Articles 91 and 94 of the Intellectual Property Rights, NCKU could not continue his employment.
In a lawful society one cannot use the word "fact" for what was a mere accusation, among many malicious accusations, such as that I failed a student unfairly. In that case the student complained, without proof, of a grade eight years before, yet the university secretly circulated that claim to discredit me. In the other case there was no proper investigation of the claim of plagiarism and no legal action for "violation of Articles 91 and 94 of the Intellectual Property Rights." So how, in a lawful society, can Mr. Chen state such an accusation as a fact?
In a lawful society I cannot repeat malicious or reckless accusations a person's wife was a prostitute as if she were in fact a prostitute. Doesn't Mr. Chen understand this? If someone maliciously or without proof accuses a professor's son of dealing in drugs I cannot, several years later, say the professor's son was "involved" in drugs, as Mr. Chen suggests I was "involved in plagiarism."
If in fact I had acted "in violation of Articles 91 and 94 of the Intellectual Property Rights" law I would have been penalized by the courts. The fact I was not penalized by the courts invalidates Mr. Chen's claim I was "in violation of Articles 91 and 94 of the Intellectual Property Rights" law and therefore, in a lawful society, Mr. Chen cannot make such a claim. Can't Mr. Chen, the Secretary-General of a high-ranked Taiwan university, understand this?
Mr. Chen's statement is the most egregious defamatory post. But National Cheng Kung University president, Hwung-Hweng Hwung's post, dated March 2011, similarly obscures facts by stating I "conveyed resentment at . . . being declined for employment renewal in 1999."
By making this statement Mr. Hwung omits the legal fact that I was illegally dismissed and not just "declined for employment renewal." This is not my claim. This was the official ruling of the Ministry of Education, dated 8 January 2001.
Nor did I "resent" what Mr. Hwung implies was a legal university action, being "declined for employment renewal." Rather I filed a formal complaint over an illegal dismissal. A complaint is not resentment. Resentment is a mood based on private feelings; a complaint is a formal action based on public facts and principles of law. Surely the president of a high-ranked university in Taiwan should know the difference.
By wording his sentence as he did, Mr. Hwung implies there was no illegal dismissal, which denies a confirmed fact and injures my dignity by stating I am resentful, not a victim of injustice. Mr. Hwung also denies a legal fact embodied in a formal Ministry of Education ruling, that I was dismissed illegally.
The Ministry of Education must understand I will not allow these counterfactual and defamatory claims to go unchallenged. I will continue to pursue avenues of legal redress in Taiwan.
At the same time I hope to impress upon American universities that having exchanges with National Cheng Kung University, or indeed—in view of Taiwan's Ministry of Education failure to protect the rights of American professors—with any Taiwan university, is not in the best interests of American education or of our human rights principles.
Sincerely,
Richard de Canio
formerly Associate Professor
Department of Foreign Languages and Literature
National Cheng Kung University
Tainan, Taiwan
