として公有財物横領の罪で起訴した。
この日、李元総統と親しい黄昭堂先生（台湾独立建国聯盟主席、昭和大学名誉教授）か
ら「動揺しているといけないと思って」と電話をいただき、「新しい証拠というのは何か
分からないが、この機密費流用の件はかなり前に裁判で無罪になっている。先に李登輝先
生が今度の総統選挙について『棄馬保台』と明言されたので、国民党が司法を利用して仕
掛けて来たのだろう。心配する必要はない」との談話を本誌でも紹介した。
李登輝元総統自身も7月1日、台北市内で開かれた台湾団結聯盟の募金パーティーで「昨
日、検察が発表した内容は全くの事実無根。私はもはや90歳。死ぬことさえ怖くない。そ
れゆえ、どんな圧力も李登輝を恐れさせることはできない。台湾にはまだまだ他にたくさ
んの李登輝の分身がいる。私は引き続き、彼らとともに、台湾民主の深化を目指していく」
などと述べられたことも、本誌で紹介した。
識者が指摘しているのは、特に時期の問題だ。総統選挙を半年後に控えたこの時期に、
いくら新しい証拠が見つかったからといって、すでに解決した問題をどうして蒸し返した
のか、ということである。疑念は払拭できない。馬英九・現総統が仕掛けたのだろうとい
う見方も根強い。
アメリカ、カナダ、ヨーロッパ、オーストラリアなど、台湾問題に関心の深い学者やジ
ャーナリスト39名は8月2日、「台北タイムズ」（Taipei Times）に馬英九・現総統への公
開質問状を掲載した。連名の名前もあるので長文ではあるが、原文を下記にご紹介したい。
公開質問状では3つの問題点を挙げている。
第1は、やはり李登輝氏が起訴された時期の問題だ。16年前の事件で、なぜつい最近にな
って証拠が出たのかを疑問視している。しかも、主な証拠の提供者は徐炳強一人しかいない。
第2に、起訴の公平性を指摘している。起訴するなら、当時の高級官員を全員調査すべき
であって、なぜ李登輝氏だけ調査され、起訴されたのか。
第3は、司法システムの公正性を指摘している。2008年11月以来、民進党元高級官員への
調査や告訴は少なくない。公開質問状を呈した学者たちは、台湾の司法が与党に利用され、
野党を攻撃する道具になってしまう懸念があると指摘している。
果たして、馬英九総統はこの公開質問に誠意をもって答えるのだろうか。
Taipei Times — Tue, Aug 02, 2011
［LETTER］
Open letter to President Ma
Dear President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九),
We the undersigned, international academics, analysts and writers from the US,
Canada, Europe and Australia, have for many years been keen observers of
political
developments in Taiwan. We were delighted when Taiwan made its
transition
to democracy in the late 1980s and early 1990s, and we continue to care deeply for
the country and its future as a free and democratic nation-state.
However, during the past three years, many of us have felt it necessary to address
publicly our concerns to you about the erosion of justice and democracy in Taiwan,
most recently in April this year regarding the charges of the “36,000 missing documents”
against a number of prominent former Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) officials.
We raised these issues as international supporters of Taiwan’s democracy.
At this time we express our deep concern about the charges against former president
Lee Teng-hui (李登輝), often referred to as “the father of Taiwan’s democracy,”
who was indicted on June 30 on charges of allegedly channeling US$7.8 million from
secret diplomatic funds into the Taiwan Research Institute. These charges and their
timing raise a number of questions that are related both to the case itself and
the integrity of the judicial system in Taiwan.
First, why did the prosecutors decide to pursue these charges at this time? The
events allegedly occurred in the years 1994 and 1995, about 16 years ago. We have
difficulty believing that prosecutors discovered evidence only recently, particularly
in view of the fact that key evidence cited by the prosecutors was dismissed by
a Supreme Court ruling in 2006 in a case involving former National Security Bureau
chief accountant Hsu Ping-chiang (徐炳強), who was charged in connection with the
missing diplomatic funds. Are these charges perhaps more directly related to the
former president’s outspokenness on current political issues, and in particular to
the upcoming presidential election?
The second issue is one of evenhandedness: The problem with the administration of
secret diplomatic funds appears to be systemic, primarily because of the lack of
transparency associated with the funds and vague guidelines for their use. Hence,
if the former president is now charged, should fairness not demand that there be
investigations, and charges, against other high officials who served at the same
time, such as the vice president, premier and provincial governor, who had similar
discretionary funds available to them?
The third issue relates to the impartiality of the judicial system. Since November
2008, there have been a number of indictments and charges against former DPP officials
and others who were and are critical of your government. The case against Lee appears
to be part of a deeply disturbing trend to use the judiciary against political
opponents. While there is an obvious need to uphold the law in a democracy, this
needs to be done fairly and evenhandedly, with no hint or appearance of any partiality.
Mr President, as head of state you bear overall responsibility for the state of
affairs in Taiwan. In democratic systems, proper checks and balances between the
executive, legislative and judiciary branches are of the utmost importance. The
executive and the legislative branches have a responsibility to exercise oversight
and to balance activism in the judiciary, just as the judiciary serves a similar
role with regard to the executive and legislative branches. Stating that your government
abides by “judicial independence” is therefore not enough. It is essential that
all participants in the judicial process ― prosecutors, judges and lawyers ―
are fully imbued with the basic principle that the judiciary is scrupulously impartial
and not given to any partisan preferences.
We, as members of the international academic community, are left with the impression
that the indictments and practices of the judiciary in Taiwan over the past three
years reflect a judicial system that is increasingly influenced by political considerations.
There has been a regression in the accomplishments of Taiwan’s momentous democratization
of the 1990s and 2000s. As good friends of Taiwan, we are deeply unsettled by this.
It undermines Taiwan’s international image as a free and democratic nation.
Mr President, we therefore urge you and your government to ensure that the judicial
system is held to the highest standards of objectivity and fairness. Taiwan has
many challenges ahead of it and it cannot afford the political divisions created
by the use of the judicial system for political purposes.
Respectfully yours,
Thomas Bartlett,
honorary research associate, history program, La Trobe University, Melbourne
Coen Blaauw,
Formosan Association for Public Affairs, Washington
Jean Pierre Cabestan,
professor and head, Department of Government and International Studies, Hong Kong
Baptist University
Gordon Chang,
author
Wen-yen Chen,
professor emeritus, University of the District of Columbia, and former president,
North American Taiwanese Professors’ Association
Stephane Corcuff,
associate professor of political science, China and Taiwan studies, University of
Lyon
Michael Danielsen,
chairman, Taiwan Corner, Copenhagen, Denmark
June Teufel Dreyer,
professor of political science, University of Miami
Norman Getsinger,
US foreign service (retired), The George Washington University graduate program
Terri Giles,
executive director, Formosa Foundation, Los Angeles
Stephen Halsey,
assistant professor of history, University of Miami
Mark Harrison,
senior lecturer, head of the Chinese School of Asian Languages and Studies, University
of Tasmania
Michael Rand Hoare,
emeritus reader at the University of London
Christopher Hughes,
professor of international relations, London School of Economics and Political Science
Thomas Hughes,
former chief of staff to late US senator Claiborne Pell, Washington
Bruce Jacobs,
professor of Asian -languages and studies, Monash University, Melbourne
Richard Kagan,
professor emeritus of history, Hamline University, and author
Jerome Keating,
associate professor, National Taipei University (retired), and author
David Kilgour,
former member of the Canadian parliament and secretary of state for Asia-Pacific
Andre Laliberte,
professor, School of Political Studies, University of Ottawa
Perry Link,
professor emeritus of East Asian Studies, Princeton University
Daniel Lynch,
associate professor, School of International Relations, University of Southern California
Victor Mair,
professor of Chinese language and literature, University of Pennsylvania
The Very Reverend
Bruce McLeod,
former president, Canadian Council of Churches, and former moderator, the United
Church of Canada
Donald Rodgers,
associate professor of political science, Austin College
Terence Russell,
associate professor of Chinese language and literature, University of Manitoba
Michael Scanlon,
associate professor (retired), Shih Chien University
Christian Schafferer,
associate professor, Department of International Trade, Overseas Chinese Institute,
chair of the Austrian Association of East Asian Studies, editor: Journal of Contemporary
Eastern Asia
David Schak,
adjunct professor of international business and Asian studies, Griffith University
Michael Stainton,
York Center for Asia Research, Toronto
Peter Tague,
professor of law, Georgetown University
Ross Terrill,
Fairbank Center, Harvard University, and author
Reverend Milo Thornberry,
author
John Tkacik Jr,
US foreign service (retired) and independent commentator, Washington
Arthur Waldron,
lauder professor of international relations, University of Pennsylvania
Gerrit van der Wees,
editor: Taiwan Communique, Washington
Josef Weidenholzer,
Chair, Institute of Social and Societal Policy, Johannes Kepler University of Linz, Austria
Michael Yahuda,
professor emeritus, the London School of Economics, and visiting scholar, George
Washington University
Stephen Yates,
president of DC International Advisory and former deputy assistant to the vice president
for National Security Affairs
