Guilty, Guilty, Guilty!

The first trial of former President Chen Shui-bian 陳水扁, some of his family members, and other defendants has run its course, with verdicts and sentences being pronounced on the tenth anniversary of the September 11 terror attacks. Chen received a life sentence, a fine of NT$200 million (approximately US$6.1 million), and had his civil rights annulled for life. His wife received a nearly identical sentence, albeit with a larger fine (NT$300 million). His son was sentenced to two-and-a-half years in prison and fined NT$150 million, while his daughter-in-law received one year and eight months while being fined the same amount. Other members of Chen’s staff received lengthy jail terms, with the exception of an accountant who turned state’s evidence.

At this point in time, the following questions seem worth consideration:

Is Chen guilty? Difficult to answer convincingly unless one possesses the Chinese language skills and legal knowledge necessary to plough through all court documents, not to mention the 1,000+ page verdict (longer even than some doctoral theses at my alma mater Princeton). The case is clearly quite complicated, especially since Taiwan’s anti-corruption laws have been evolving over the past decade, meaning that some alleged crimes may not have been illegal when they were committed. However, at the very least Chen is guilty of misdeeds that have deeply disappointed and betrayed the trust of so many Taiwanese citizens who elected him President in 2000 and 2004. Even close supporters have issued calls for Chen and his family members to make public apologies for their actions.

Did he get a fair trial? A judgment call, but concerns have been raised about the length of his detention (over ten months now) and other aspects of the legal process. According to one article published in The Economist, while most Taiwanese believe that Chen was involved in some form of wrongdoing, there are concerns over whether he was treated impartially, particularly when a panel of judges that had ordered his release from detention was “mysteriously and secretively replaced” by a new panel, which subsequently presided over the trial.

Was the sentence too harsh? Hardly any Taiwanese politician found guilty of corruption has been condemned to such a lengthy prison term, while Chen’s wife and children are also facing long sentences and fines exceeding millions of US dollars. The Los Angeles Times called the sentence “unexpectedly stiff”, while the Associated Press noted that its severity has caused some to believe that Chen was being “…persecuted for his pro-independence views and his central role in ending the 50-year monopoly on power of the now-resurgent Nationalists.”

Will he appeal? He is certain to do so (especially since he apparently gave up on winning the first trial a long time ago). In Taiwan, cases are regularly overturned on appeal, so this is far from over. It is also interesting to note that, just prior to the verdict and sentencing, one of President Ma Ying-jeou 馬英九’s mentors, Harvard University law professor Jerome A. Cohen (孔傑榮), visited Legislative Yuan Speaker Wang Chin-ping 王金平 and opined that it would be a good idea to arrange for the conditional release of Chen during the appeals process, so that he could mount an effective legal defense.

How does Chen’s sentencing affect the KMT? While it certainly pleases the party’s base and provides a distraction from the government’s initial response to the devastation wrought by Typhoon Morakot, the sentence’s impact on independent voters is unclear.

How does his sentencing impact the DPP? Some of its leaders probably wish the case would go away, as it reminds voters of the disillusionment that caused them to cast the DPP out of power in 2008. It remains to be seen whether Chen’s sentence (and those of the other defendants) will mobilize some of the party’s base and independent voters, who recall the days of the White Terror when Taiwanese elites were also subject to long prison sentences following judicial procedures that failed to convince the public of their fairness.

Will other politicians be held to the same strict standards? Chen’s trial and sentencing may mark the start of a rigorous anti-corruption drive, and perhaps we will see crooked politicians from both parties being subjected to lengthy detentions and harsh prison terms…but…since 2008, politicians prosecuted and detained on corruption charges since have tended to be DPP members.

How has the case shaped popular views of the judicial system? This depends on whom you ask, and whether the question focuses on the outcome or the process. Some view Chen’s sentencing as a powerful statement of how Taiwan’s judiciary has proven independent enough to pass judgment on a former president, while others see it as an indication of the judicial system’s once again being wielded as a tool for the state to use against its enemies. It will be interesting to see if the judicial rituals described in my book Divine Justice become more or less popular during the next few months…