Judicial Corruption in Taiwan by Professor W. S. King
Collusion between officials and business men, mutual protection between officials and officials, judges in violation of the law, prosecutors not to prosecute, and the Supervisory Committee not to be held accountable for violations of the law!
Public Chung Cheng University Crime Research Center "2015 National Public Crime Victims and the Government’s Satisfaction in Maintaining Public Security and Governance Survey" results were released. 84% of the people questioned the justice and fairness of the judges, and 76.5% of the people did not believe that the prosecutors were impartial in handling cases. 78.7% of the people in Taiwan are still quite dissatisfied with the effectiveness of the government in preventing corruption cases.
1. In this case, the Taipei City Government allowed builders to build illegally. The builders obtained illegal benefits of NT$170 million. The government acts in collusion with the business. The officials protect each other. The judge of the High Administrative Court "Zhong, Qi-Wei (translated by sound)" judged violated the law. The "Hou, Jing-Wen (translated by sound)" Prosecutors in the Taipei District Court Prosecutor's Office violated the law and did not prosecute. The Supervisory Committee of the "Tsai, Pei-Shun (translated by sound)" of the Supervisory House (Yuan) violated the law and did not impeach.
2. The illegal construction of the builder could construct only three-floor but the illegal height is constructed to ten-floor. The west side should be retracted from the land boundary by 100 cm, and currently only retracted by 4 cm. The fireproof glass bricks on the west side of the exterior wall do not have a one-hour fire protection time limit, according to the building regulations, the fire preventing interval must be set back 1.5 meters from the boundary line. The west exterior wall has many exhaust gas outlets (not closed at the scene so far), according to the building regulations, the building should be retreated from the boundary line 2 meters behind. The outdoor imported gas supply pipe in the base is illegally exposed and installed on the wall. Judge “Zhong, Qi-Wei” ruled against the law and stated that "the distance between the two buildings to prevent an earthquake collision is the clearance distance between the two buildings. The judgment stated that “my house has been retracted by 8 cm from the boundary line, and the illeagal building has retracted by 4 cmfrom the boundary line, for a total of 12 cm, which has exceeded the earthquake collision prevention distance of 11.18 cm. ” This is a wrong judgment.
3. The Supervisory Committee Tsai who was nominated by the former National President Ma Ying-Jeou retired on July 31, 2020 in Taiwan. He was a former President of a National University. I originally thought he was a model in the education world, but unexpectedly did not adopt the results of two previous evaluations by the Land Affairs Office, the previous demarcation results of the Taipei District Court Prosecutor’s Office, and the previous demarcation results of the Taichung City Civil Engineers Association. The above four demarcation results all confirmed that the west side of the disputed building was only 4 cm away from the boundary line.
4. The supervisory committee "Tsai, Pei-Shun" adopted the private survey data of the builder's architect, and then commissioned the Land Surveying and Mapping Center of the Ministry of the Interior to re-measure. Then, he overthrew the results of the previous four legal boundary inspections by the Taipei City Guting Land Administration Office, the Taipei District Court Prosecutor's Office, and the Taichung City Civil Engineering Institute Association. The Supervisory Committee Tsai expanded the land area for the builders, falsely claiming that the boundary point was moved to the center of my wall where had retreated 8 cm from the boundary line. The Supervisory Committee Tsai deliberately tried to exonerate the builders from blame by occupying my land.
5. The Supervisory Committee Tsai refused to provide all the boundary data, re-measurement results, and meeting records of the builder's architect and the Land Surveying and Mapping Center. The Supervisory Committee Tsai did not punish officials such as the Taipei City Government, but instead trapped my own rights. The Supervisory Committee Tsai also forced an online announcement to close the case.
6. The online announcement of the case closure did not inform me that the case had been closed. Instead, I inadvertently saw that the case has been closed online. I have no alternative but to file a criminal complaint with the Taipei District Prosecutor’s Office, accusing the former Supervisory Committee Tsai of malfeasance and occupying. Unexpectedly, the Taipei District Prosecutors Office signed the case closure that it did not specifically accuse the suspected facts. The criminal complaint has specifically accused the suspected facts of the crime and has fully reported the factual elements of criminal responsibility. However, the Taipei District Prosecutor Office did not name the prosecutors and clerks, nor did they indicate their contact telephone numbers, fax numbers, and e-mail address, which violated the regulations of the Executive Yuan’s Document Processing Manual for official documents. People can inevitably question whether the prosecutor “Hou, Jingwen” is still handling the case.
7. Taiwan’s municipal administration and judicial system are severely corrupt. The KMT Party or the Democratic Progressive Party, the National President, the Supervisory House (Yuan), the State Council (Executive Yuan), or the Legislative Assembly (Yuan) cannot control prosecutors and judges. The Supervisory House (Yuan) also protects officials and has no supervisory function, so judges, prosecutors, and supervisory committees should all set up juries. There is a Taiwanese proverb “if you have money, you will be sentenced to life, but if you do not have money, you will be sentenced to death”. Taiwan’s justice is so dark!