這次感恩節的照片與經驗, 雖然有大部分在做苦工,例如組裝桌子整理庭院與鏟雪等,也有好玩的經驗，如使用壁爐與新買的泡澡玩具等．詳見此
Sunday, November 30, 2008
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
轉載: 幾個國際上關於台灣人權的近況聲明
懶的翻譯,只是整理一下幾個國際上對於近來台灣人權倒退的幾個聲明.
最早的是11/13加拿大的人權組織,到11/20的兩個國際人權組織Freedom House與The International Federation for Human Rights 的公開聲明或是公開信函,都是關切台灣政府因為陳雲林來台期間政府侵犯人權的作為.
過了一週, 台灣相關單位終於在今天(11/26)以調動職務的方式回應這些要求. 台灣政府的處置是對這些疑似迫害人權的濫權警察的予以升官,應該是嘉勉這些警察侵害人權, 大概也是在鼓勵其他警察應該跟進吧!
台灣政府,我怎麼看怎麼都"感覺"是與國際背道而馳啊! 還是說,我太不會感覺了?
-----------------------------
第一個是加拿大人權組織對馬政府發出的觀察名單. 11/13日發出的.
Canadian Human Rights Association Puts Ma Ying-jeou's Government on Watch ListThursday November 13, by Jerome F. Keating Ph.D.
Statement by Taiwanese Human Rights Association of Canada, November 13, 2008
Condemns Ongoing Political Prosecutions in Taiwan Calls on Human Rights groups to put the "Republic of China" on watch list
The Taiwanese Human Rights Association of Canada has watched with increasing concern over the past few months as the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government on Taiwan has carried out a series of arrests, detentions without charge, impeachments, and "evidence gathering" raids against officials of the previous DPP administration, legislators, local government officials and diplomats. These are ostensibly all part of an anti-corruption campaign to uncover evidence for prosecution of President Chen Shui-bian and his family for financial misdeeds. But they have been accompanied, perhaps driven, by a vicious hate campaign against "the monster Chen Shui-bian" (United Daily News October 30) in the KMT media, and frequent "revelations" of confidential prosecutorial information by KMT legislators.
Looking at this complex series of events, we are led to conclude that the KMT is abusing the justice system, Control Yuan, and media in Taiwan, using them as tools of character assassination and a political settling of accounts with the opposition.
Almost 30 years ago, in 1980, the KMT carried out a similar campaign to decapitate the opposition after the December 10, 1979 Kaohsiung Incident. Then it was under the excuse of opposing violence and suppressing rebellion. A campaign of vilification and dehumanization of the accused was followed by a series of show trials. How ironic that Chen Shui-bian was a defense lawyer for some of those charged. Today this kind of political play is being re-enacted, under the banner of opposing corruption.
THRAC calls on the KMT to cease these political prosecutions, free those who have been detained without charge, and respect the independence of the justice system. In a democracy change of parties in power is normal, as is holding officials responsible for their deeds. But majority governments must respect the opinions and rights of minorities on controversial issues. Political settling of accounts is the death knell of democracy.
We call on all organizations and individuals who have supported Taiwan's struggle for democracy and human rights these past 30 years, to once again put Taiwan on their watch list. We urge them to express their concern over these disturbing developments.
We commit ourselves to renewed vigilance of human rights in Taiwan in the current poisoned political situation there.
For inquiries: Rev. Michael Stainton, President, THRAC michaels@yorku.ca or 416-224-1870
第二個是Freedom House的: http://www.freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=70&release=725
這在11/20日發布的
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Laura Ingalls
Freedom House Calls for Inquiry into Taiwan Clashes
Washington
November 20, 2008
Freedom House urges Taiwan's government to create an independent commission to thoroughly investigate clashes between police and activists protesting Chinese envoy Chen Yunlin's historic visit and recommend needed reforms.
"A public investigation of the violence—which involved both sides—will send a critical message that the new government of President Ma Ying-jeou is interested in upholding the democratic values of transparency and accountability," said Jennifer Windsor, Freedom House executive director. "The inquiry should examine evidence on both sides and recommend any needed reforms to police practices and the legal framework governing demonstrations."
Hundreds of university students are currently staging a sit-in in Taipei's Freedom Square and several other cities to protest the government's handling of the incident. During Chen’s visit, police reportedly used heavy-handed tactics—including physical assault, arbitrary detention and destruction of property—to prevent Chen from seeing symbols of Taiwanese or Tibetan independence, as well as broader demonstrations against the Chinese regime. Demonstrators also employed violence against police, throwing rocks and petrol bombs outside Chen's hotel on November 6.
The clashes reveal a need for police to undergo crowd control training that adheres to the standards used in other democracies. Likewise, demonstrators and political advocacy groups must recommit themselves to orderly protests that avoid violence under any circumstances.
The inquiry commission should examine controversial passages in Taiwan's Assembly and Parade Law, such as restrictions on where people are allowed to demonstrate, and determine whether they need to be liberalized to protect citizens' rights to freedom of expression and assembly. The commission should also investigate claims that police are selectively enforcing the law.
The visit by Chen, the most senior Chinese official to visit Taiwan since it split from China in 1949, and the recent arrests of several opposition party figures are raising concerns that that President Ma and his Kuomintang Party may rollback democratic freedoms.
"The government must renew its commitment to tolerating robust freedom of assembly and peaceful protest, no matter what the cause," said Windsor.
Taiwan is ranked Free in the 2008 edition of Freedom in the World, Freedom House's survey of political rights and civil liberties, and in the 2008 version of Freedom of the Press.
For more information on Taiwan, visit: Freedom in the World 2008: TaiwanFreedom of the Press 2008: Taiwan
Freedom House, an independent nongovernmental organization that supports the expansion of freedom in the world, has been monitoring political rights and civil liberties in Taiwan since 1972.
第三個也是在11/20發出的,是國際人權組織正式發函給馬政府,包含馬英九與劉兆玄,關切台灣人權.
Thursday 20 November 2008
TaiwanDeep concern regarding the detention and attacks against citizens protesting peacefully during the visit of Chinese envoy Mr. CHEN YunlinOpen letter toPresident Ma Ying-jeou
Premier Liu Chao-hsuan
Republic of China – Taiwan
Your Excellencies,
The International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) is writing to you to express its deep concern regarding the detention and attacks against citizens protesting peacefully during the visit of Chinese envoy Mr. CHEN Yunlin. FIDH believes that such arrests and violence are grave violations of human rights, under the pretext of national security.
According to the information received, since November 3rd, 2008, the city of Taipei has been heavily occupied by more than 7,000 police officers. The authorities have taken many drastic measures, including: confiscating and damaging private property, harassing and assaulting people who came too close to undefined or vaguely defined areas, clearing communal highway lanes with force, conducting random searches and arrests, and restricting the freedom of movement of citizens. These actions have been taken during Mr. CHEN’s visit, in the name of protecting security.
However, we fear these aggressions in fact aim at suppressing the right to freedom of expression of citizens. To supplement this violence, there are also unprecedented restrictions which clearly overpass the limits of ensuring security. For example, citizens have been restricted from displaying or carrying the national flag of Taiwan, forbidden to declare that “Taiwan is not part of China”, forbidden from carrying filming devices, and restricted from playing any music the authorities consider inappropriate.
These measures seem to be aimed at silencing political opinions rather than protecting security, and thus they blatantly violate the Constitution of Taiwan, notably Articles 11 and 14 which protect freedom of expression and international human rights standards. Consequently, FIDH requests that the National Police Agency and National Security Bureau, bound by the Constitution and the national legislation, should be held responsible for violating their legal obligations. The Judicial Yuan and Control Yuan should immediately conduct independent and impartial investigations into all allegations of human rights violations and hold all personnel in office accountable for neglecting their civil and legal obligations, in line with the Judicial Yuan’s recent statement that “it is very important to form an objective and solid review standard, and make the constitutional reviews more predictable and trust-worthy to people”. Those who perpetrated these violations, particularly in the National Police Agency and National Security Bureau, must be held accountable, in accordance with Article 24 of the Constitution of Taiwan, which stipulates that “Any public employee who, in violation of law, infringes upon the freedom or right of any person shall, in addition to being subject to disciplinary punishment in accordance with law, be liable to criminal and civil action. The victim may, in accordance with law, claim damages from the State for any injury sustained therefrom.”
More generally, FIDH calls upon the government to amend the Parade and Assembly Law, in particular : to abolish the requirement for mandatory permits and adopt the system of voluntary basis and the clause on special area of restriction, which gives too much discretion to the authority to restrict people’s freedom of association and freedom of expression. In addition the authorities should abolish the order to dismiss as well as the provisions on special criminal punishment, which is a legacy of the martial law era. Finally, Taiwan should establish the protocol for law enforcement personnel who should have the obligation to clearly announce his or her identity when on duty, to ensure legitimacy and accountability.
Your Excellencies,
Our Organization firmly believes that the fruit of Taiwan’s remarkable democratization has landmark significance to the Asian continent as a whole. We therefore express our serious concern over the alarming human rights degradation in Taiwan, and we do take it as a signal of a negative trend undermining the values of democracy and human rights on which Taiwan should be based. Hoping that you will take into consideration the above mentioned concerns, I remain,
Yours sincerely,
Souhayr Belhassen
FIDH President
最早的是11/13加拿大的人權組織,到11/20的兩個國際人權組織Freedom House與The International Federation for Human Rights 的公開聲明或是公開信函,都是關切台灣政府因為陳雲林來台期間政府侵犯人權的作為.
過了一週, 台灣相關單位終於在今天(11/26)以調動職務的方式回應這些要求. 台灣政府的處置是對這些疑似迫害人權的濫權警察的予以升官,應該是嘉勉這些警察侵害人權, 大概也是在鼓勵其他警察應該跟進吧!
台灣政府,我怎麼看怎麼都"感覺"是與國際背道而馳啊! 還是說,我太不會感覺了?
-----------------------------
第一個是加拿大人權組織對馬政府發出的觀察名單. 11/13日發出的.
Canadian Human Rights Association Puts Ma Ying-jeou's Government on Watch ListThursday November 13, by Jerome F. Keating Ph.D.
Statement by Taiwanese Human Rights Association of Canada, November 13, 2008
Condemns Ongoing Political Prosecutions in Taiwan Calls on Human Rights groups to put the "Republic of China" on watch list
The Taiwanese Human Rights Association of Canada has watched with increasing concern over the past few months as the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government on Taiwan has carried out a series of arrests, detentions without charge, impeachments, and "evidence gathering" raids against officials of the previous DPP administration, legislators, local government officials and diplomats. These are ostensibly all part of an anti-corruption campaign to uncover evidence for prosecution of President Chen Shui-bian and his family for financial misdeeds. But they have been accompanied, perhaps driven, by a vicious hate campaign against "the monster Chen Shui-bian" (United Daily News October 30) in the KMT media, and frequent "revelations" of confidential prosecutorial information by KMT legislators.
Looking at this complex series of events, we are led to conclude that the KMT is abusing the justice system, Control Yuan, and media in Taiwan, using them as tools of character assassination and a political settling of accounts with the opposition.
Almost 30 years ago, in 1980, the KMT carried out a similar campaign to decapitate the opposition after the December 10, 1979 Kaohsiung Incident. Then it was under the excuse of opposing violence and suppressing rebellion. A campaign of vilification and dehumanization of the accused was followed by a series of show trials. How ironic that Chen Shui-bian was a defense lawyer for some of those charged. Today this kind of political play is being re-enacted, under the banner of opposing corruption.
THRAC calls on the KMT to cease these political prosecutions, free those who have been detained without charge, and respect the independence of the justice system. In a democracy change of parties in power is normal, as is holding officials responsible for their deeds. But majority governments must respect the opinions and rights of minorities on controversial issues. Political settling of accounts is the death knell of democracy.
We call on all organizations and individuals who have supported Taiwan's struggle for democracy and human rights these past 30 years, to once again put Taiwan on their watch list. We urge them to express their concern over these disturbing developments.
We commit ourselves to renewed vigilance of human rights in Taiwan in the current poisoned political situation there.
For inquiries: Rev. Michael Stainton, President, THRAC michaels@yorku.ca or 416-224-1870
第二個是Freedom House的: http://www.freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=70&release=725
這在11/20日發布的
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Laura Ingalls
Freedom House Calls for Inquiry into Taiwan Clashes
Washington
November 20, 2008
Freedom House urges Taiwan's government to create an independent commission to thoroughly investigate clashes between police and activists protesting Chinese envoy Chen Yunlin's historic visit and recommend needed reforms.
"A public investigation of the violence—which involved both sides—will send a critical message that the new government of President Ma Ying-jeou is interested in upholding the democratic values of transparency and accountability," said Jennifer Windsor, Freedom House executive director. "The inquiry should examine evidence on both sides and recommend any needed reforms to police practices and the legal framework governing demonstrations."
Hundreds of university students are currently staging a sit-in in Taipei's Freedom Square and several other cities to protest the government's handling of the incident. During Chen’s visit, police reportedly used heavy-handed tactics—including physical assault, arbitrary detention and destruction of property—to prevent Chen from seeing symbols of Taiwanese or Tibetan independence, as well as broader demonstrations against the Chinese regime. Demonstrators also employed violence against police, throwing rocks and petrol bombs outside Chen's hotel on November 6.
The clashes reveal a need for police to undergo crowd control training that adheres to the standards used in other democracies. Likewise, demonstrators and political advocacy groups must recommit themselves to orderly protests that avoid violence under any circumstances.
The inquiry commission should examine controversial passages in Taiwan's Assembly and Parade Law, such as restrictions on where people are allowed to demonstrate, and determine whether they need to be liberalized to protect citizens' rights to freedom of expression and assembly. The commission should also investigate claims that police are selectively enforcing the law.
The visit by Chen, the most senior Chinese official to visit Taiwan since it split from China in 1949, and the recent arrests of several opposition party figures are raising concerns that that President Ma and his Kuomintang Party may rollback democratic freedoms.
"The government must renew its commitment to tolerating robust freedom of assembly and peaceful protest, no matter what the cause," said Windsor.
Taiwan is ranked Free in the 2008 edition of Freedom in the World, Freedom House's survey of political rights and civil liberties, and in the 2008 version of Freedom of the Press.
For more information on Taiwan, visit: Freedom in the World 2008: TaiwanFreedom of the Press 2008: Taiwan
Freedom House, an independent nongovernmental organization that supports the expansion of freedom in the world, has been monitoring political rights and civil liberties in Taiwan since 1972.
第三個也是在11/20發出的,是國際人權組織正式發函給馬政府,包含馬英九與劉兆玄,關切台灣人權.
Thursday 20 November 2008
TaiwanDeep concern regarding the detention and attacks against citizens protesting peacefully during the visit of Chinese envoy Mr. CHEN YunlinOpen letter toPresident Ma Ying-jeou
Premier Liu Chao-hsuan
Republic of China – Taiwan
Your Excellencies,
The International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) is writing to you to express its deep concern regarding the detention and attacks against citizens protesting peacefully during the visit of Chinese envoy Mr. CHEN Yunlin. FIDH believes that such arrests and violence are grave violations of human rights, under the pretext of national security.
According to the information received, since November 3rd, 2008, the city of Taipei has been heavily occupied by more than 7,000 police officers. The authorities have taken many drastic measures, including: confiscating and damaging private property, harassing and assaulting people who came too close to undefined or vaguely defined areas, clearing communal highway lanes with force, conducting random searches and arrests, and restricting the freedom of movement of citizens. These actions have been taken during Mr. CHEN’s visit, in the name of protecting security.
However, we fear these aggressions in fact aim at suppressing the right to freedom of expression of citizens. To supplement this violence, there are also unprecedented restrictions which clearly overpass the limits of ensuring security. For example, citizens have been restricted from displaying or carrying the national flag of Taiwan, forbidden to declare that “Taiwan is not part of China”, forbidden from carrying filming devices, and restricted from playing any music the authorities consider inappropriate.
These measures seem to be aimed at silencing political opinions rather than protecting security, and thus they blatantly violate the Constitution of Taiwan, notably Articles 11 and 14 which protect freedom of expression and international human rights standards. Consequently, FIDH requests that the National Police Agency and National Security Bureau, bound by the Constitution and the national legislation, should be held responsible for violating their legal obligations. The Judicial Yuan and Control Yuan should immediately conduct independent and impartial investigations into all allegations of human rights violations and hold all personnel in office accountable for neglecting their civil and legal obligations, in line with the Judicial Yuan’s recent statement that “it is very important to form an objective and solid review standard, and make the constitutional reviews more predictable and trust-worthy to people”. Those who perpetrated these violations, particularly in the National Police Agency and National Security Bureau, must be held accountable, in accordance with Article 24 of the Constitution of Taiwan, which stipulates that “Any public employee who, in violation of law, infringes upon the freedom or right of any person shall, in addition to being subject to disciplinary punishment in accordance with law, be liable to criminal and civil action. The victim may, in accordance with law, claim damages from the State for any injury sustained therefrom.”
More generally, FIDH calls upon the government to amend the Parade and Assembly Law, in particular : to abolish the requirement for mandatory permits and adopt the system of voluntary basis and the clause on special area of restriction, which gives too much discretion to the authority to restrict people’s freedom of association and freedom of expression. In addition the authorities should abolish the order to dismiss as well as the provisions on special criminal punishment, which is a legacy of the martial law era. Finally, Taiwan should establish the protocol for law enforcement personnel who should have the obligation to clearly announce his or her identity when on duty, to ensure legitimacy and accountability.
Your Excellencies,
Our Organization firmly believes that the fruit of Taiwan’s remarkable democratization has landmark significance to the Asian continent as a whole. We therefore express our serious concern over the alarming human rights degradation in Taiwan, and we do take it as a signal of a negative trend undermining the values of democracy and human rights on which Taiwan should be based. Hoping that you will take into consideration the above mentioned concerns, I remain,
Yours sincerely,
Souhayr Belhassen
FIDH President
Saturday, November 15, 2008
統計,經濟, 司法與人權 (revised on 10/5/2010)
曾經在討論"統計是沒有預設立場的嗎?"一文中我提到:
最近檢方的濫權羈押,讓我對這件事情又重新思考.
首先,一個文明國家的法律,為了避免冤獄(也就是把冤獄視為比逍遙法外還嚴重),都會盡可能的假設被告是無罪的,也就是所謂的無罪推定原則(the presumption of innocence – being innocent until proven guilty ; 第一五四條：「被告未經審判證明有罪確定前，推定其為無罪」). 在這個無罪推定原則的前提之下, 萬一誤判而造成的冤獄的機會會遠小於相反的假設(假設被告有罪,找證據還被告清白), 以上面表格的例子,在其他變數不變下,冤獄的機會分別是5%與20%.
無罪推定原則的確立在維護犯罪嫌疑人與被告的合法權益.簡單講就是保障人權的做法.
因為受到法律的保護,檢方濫權的羈押造成社會代價.第一, 檢方的責任在起訴, 在被告沒有串共或逃亡等情況下不應該濫押,否則有違反被告被法律保障的人權之嫌. 以台灣的情況來講，貪污案件的定罪律偏低,只有五成五,相對於全部刑案的定罪律有九成三. 正因為定罪律偏低而造成民眾有違法羈押的疑慮而對司法公正性感到懷疑. 造成人民對司法公正性有所質疑,這是第一個成本.
其次,既然被告的人權受到檢方侵害,一但審判結果無罪,那麼無罪的被告就可以依法申請冤獄賠償. 這個部分就是我說的濫押造成的社會成本. 也就是檢方的濫押行為有 “外部成本”. (這裡有個無罪被押八天國賠四萬的例子.) 那麼台灣的冤獄到底有多少社會成本呢? 以88年為例,冤獄賠償金額高達一億七千五百萬, 而且每年增加中.
解決外部性(externality)的最好方式是將外部性內部化,讓行為者享受利益的同時也支付成本. 關於這點, 我有兩件事要講. 第一: 上述的冤獄賠償是檢方造成的外部成本, 如果要內部化就是讓這個冤獄賠償由檢方來負擔. 台灣的制度其實已算健全. 依法在國家負出冤獄賠償之後可以向 “怠職法官求償的權利，但實際上，因司法人員「官官相護」的習性而從未落實求償，顯非負責任的「法治國家」應有的現象！”[1]. 由此可知雖然制度上已有規範,但卻沒有確實執行. 想要解決外部成本內部化的話,這各部分應該確實執行.
第二個關於外部性的問題是當外部性產生的是利益的情況.先舉個簡單的例子: 當維修廠的數量與地點往往影響車子的銷售量. 因為保養的方便性可能促使消費者在購車時候決定某產牌的車子. 同樣的,外部性內部化是最好的解決方法(之一),當內部化有困難時,搭便車的問題(free-rider)就很嚴重. 之前台北市長所謂的遊行集會要課稅(這是成本)之所以顯得好笑是因為,如果集會遊行的結果是言論自由這個好處,那麼有沒有機制可以確保只有當初參加遊行集會的付稅者能夠享受到言論自由? 如果沒辦法,那麼其他一般大眾說穿了只是這個言論自由外部利益的free rider而已.
當某行為的外部性沒有辦法被內部化,外部利益(如抗議後而獲得的言論自由)就只好由大眾分享,而外部成本(如冤獄而付出的國賠)也就只好由大眾承擔.怎麼承擔? 繳稅啊!
反之如果放棄所謂的無罪推定原則呢? 也就是假設被告有罪(上面表格藍色字體那一列),抱著" 寧可錯殺一百"的心態, 或是講好聽點,防範未然, 例如三國志卷38裡的: 時天旱禁酒，釀者有刑。吏於人家索得釀具，論者欲令與作酒者同罰。(雍與先主游觀，見一男女行道，謂先主曰：「彼人欲行淫，何以不縛？」先主曰：「卿何以知之？」雍對曰：「彼有其具，與欲釀者同。」先主大笑，而原欲釀者。 )
根據調查(詳見下), 台灣有高達47.3%抱著所謂 “寧可錯殺一百”的心態:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
台灣社會變遷調查:
第四題所有司法體系 (法院) 都難免會犯錯，您認為哪一種情況比較嚴重？
把沒有犯法的人判成有罪：37.7% (冤獄)
把有犯法的人判成無罪：47.3% (逍遙法外)
沒有另一面資訊，頂多 有無法選擇佔 14.4 %
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
如果我們回到統計上以須無假設=有罪,那麼在其他不變的情況下,台灣的冤獄將是原來的4倍之多(20%的機率 vs 5%),也就是多了三倍, 那麼冤獄付出的社會成本也是三倍,由原來的一億七千五百萬(175000000)增加五億二千五百萬(525000000)而來到七億(700000000)!
而這些,還只是機率上的誤判所造成的冤獄而已,如果有檢察官刻意抱著 “教訓”無辜被告的心態,(例如朱朝亮檢察官在被今週刊訪問時說的,詳見立即停止濫權羈押一文),那麼冤獄將更多,冤獄造成的外部成本也更大. 要改善司法,從落實向怠職司法人員求償冤獄賠償(即"外部成本內部化")開始吧!
備註:
1) DG看了之後提出一個蠻好的觀點. 檢察官的責任如果在起訴, 那麼很有可能檢察官的預設立場是被告有罪,也可能因此造成檢察官濫押的行為(目前台灣看來的確如此). 不過即便如此,冤獄的認定要到了法官判決官司定讞之後確定無罪,那麼之前不必要的羈押部分方可申請所謂的冤獄補償.在無罪推論的前提下,法官的預設立場應該是被告=無罪的.回到完全就機率來看,以表格所舉的例子來講冤獄的可能性還是5%.
2) 既然檢察官的預設立場可能是被告=有罪(上表中藍色),那麼濫押的行為可能很浮濫,如此一來冤獄可能高達20%,那麼就更應該落實冤獄賠償由怠職司法人員付出的政策,使濫押的外部成本可以內部化.關於這次警察執法過當甚至違法侵害人權,我贊成受害者提告,但我反對提出國賠.我曾經和朋友激烈辯論這個部分. 除了法律上的差異, 我反對提出國家賠償原因也正在此. 國家賠償的正是警察行為的外部成本由全體大眾買單;相反的提告相關警察才可以迫使執法者造成的外部成本內部化.否則警察也會和濫押的檢察官一樣,繼續怠職與濫權而已.
[1] 詳見曾肇昌: 冤獄要賠償
-----------
延伸閱讀:
走鋼索的民主
立即停止濫權羈押
轉載: 國際特赦組織 籲台灣警察勿濫用暴力
參加研討會前記: 惱人的撘便車(free rider)問題
4/16/2009:
黃東熊︰不修法 馬下台也可能被押(4/12/2009)
裡面提到一些數據: "警察大學教授黃炎東則從數據比較德國和台灣羈押原因，他說德國雖也有「湮滅罪證」、「重罪」等羈押事由，但兩者被法官裁准收押比例共約為三％，至於較不具爭議的羈押事由「逃亡」為九十七％，但台灣「湮滅罪證」和「重罪」的裁押比率為四十七％，「預防性羈押」為二十四％，「逃亡」為二十九％，顯見羈押事由不當使用。"
如果有數據顯示這些預防性羈押的案子結果是錯押, 那就造成很多可以申請冤獄賠償的案件(國賠), 浪費資源, 應該早日落實司法改革,特別是濫押成本內部化!
added on 4/21/2009:
46萬換冤獄、破產http://taiwantt.org.tw/taiwanimpression/2009/20090104-10.htm96.07.11 總統令：修正「冤獄賠償法」http://www.hcbara.org.tw/xp02_03.htm
==updated on 10/5/2010==
抗議陳雲林 遭警打傷者 還有人要爭國賠 比照江一德案索賠: 這是事情最新的發展. 完全應驗我之前的擔心. 雖然表面上國賠獲准,但是之前控告警方濫權的案子卻不成立. 警方濫權的外部性完全由國賠吸收,再加上刑事法部分不成立,怎麼能夠解決外部性的問題呢?
最近檢方的濫權羈押,讓我對這件事情又重新思考.
首先,一個文明國家的法律,為了避免冤獄(也就是把冤獄視為比逍遙法外還嚴重),都會盡可能的假設被告是無罪的,也就是所謂的無罪推定原則(the presumption of innocence – being innocent until proven guilty ; 第一五四條：「被告未經審判證明有罪確定前，推定其為無罪」). 在這個無罪推定原則的前提之下, 萬一誤判而造成的冤獄的機會會遠小於相反的假設(假設被告有罪,找證據還被告清白), 以上面表格的例子,在其他變數不變下,冤獄的機會分別是5%與20%.
無罪推定原則的確立在維護犯罪嫌疑人與被告的合法權益.簡單講就是保障人權的做法.
因為受到法律的保護,檢方濫權的羈押造成社會代價.第一, 檢方的責任在起訴, 在被告沒有串共或逃亡等情況下不應該濫押,否則有違反被告被法律保障的人權之嫌. 以台灣的情況來講，貪污案件的定罪律偏低,只有五成五,相對於全部刑案的定罪律有九成三. 正因為定罪律偏低而造成民眾有違法羈押的疑慮而對司法公正性感到懷疑. 造成人民對司法公正性有所質疑,這是第一個成本.
其次,既然被告的人權受到檢方侵害,一但審判結果無罪,那麼無罪的被告就可以依法申請冤獄賠償. 這個部分就是我說的濫押造成的社會成本. 也就是檢方的濫押行為有 “外部成本”. (這裡有個無罪被押八天國賠四萬的例子.) 那麼台灣的冤獄到底有多少社會成本呢? 以88年為例,冤獄賠償金額高達一億七千五百萬, 而且每年增加中.
解決外部性(externality)的最好方式是將外部性內部化,讓行為者享受利益的同時也支付成本. 關於這點, 我有兩件事要講. 第一: 上述的冤獄賠償是檢方造成的外部成本, 如果要內部化就是讓這個冤獄賠償由檢方來負擔. 台灣的制度其實已算健全. 依法在國家負出冤獄賠償之後可以向 “怠職法官求償的權利，但實際上，因司法人員「官官相護」的習性而從未落實求償，顯非負責任的「法治國家」應有的現象！”[1]. 由此可知雖然制度上已有規範,但卻沒有確實執行. 想要解決外部成本內部化的話,這各部分應該確實執行.
第二個關於外部性的問題是當外部性產生的是利益的情況.先舉個簡單的例子: 當維修廠的數量與地點往往影響車子的銷售量. 因為保養的方便性可能促使消費者在購車時候決定某產牌的車子. 同樣的,外部性內部化是最好的解決方法(之一),當內部化有困難時,搭便車的問題(free-rider)就很嚴重. 之前台北市長所謂的遊行集會要課稅(這是成本)之所以顯得好笑是因為,如果集會遊行的結果是言論自由這個好處,那麼有沒有機制可以確保只有當初參加遊行集會的付稅者能夠享受到言論自由? 如果沒辦法,那麼其他一般大眾說穿了只是這個言論自由外部利益的free rider而已.
當某行為的外部性沒有辦法被內部化,外部利益(如抗議後而獲得的言論自由)就只好由大眾分享,而外部成本(如冤獄而付出的國賠)也就只好由大眾承擔.怎麼承擔? 繳稅啊!
反之如果放棄所謂的無罪推定原則呢? 也就是假設被告有罪(上面表格藍色字體那一列),抱著" 寧可錯殺一百"的心態, 或是講好聽點,防範未然, 例如三國志卷38裡的: 時天旱禁酒，釀者有刑。吏於人家索得釀具，論者欲令與作酒者同罰。(雍與先主游觀，見一男女行道，謂先主曰：「彼人欲行淫，何以不縛？」先主曰：「卿何以知之？」雍對曰：「彼有其具，與欲釀者同。」先主大笑，而原欲釀者。 )
根據調查(詳見下), 台灣有高達47.3%抱著所謂 “寧可錯殺一百”的心態:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
台灣社會變遷調查:
第四題所有司法體系 (法院) 都難免會犯錯，您認為哪一種情況比較嚴重？
把沒有犯法的人判成有罪：37.7% (冤獄)
把有犯法的人判成無罪：47.3% (逍遙法外)
沒有另一面資訊，頂多 有無法選擇佔 14.4 %
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
如果我們回到統計上以須無假設=有罪,那麼在其他不變的情況下,台灣的冤獄將是原來的4倍之多(20%的機率 vs 5%),也就是多了三倍, 那麼冤獄付出的社會成本也是三倍,由原來的一億七千五百萬(175000000)增加五億二千五百萬(525000000)而來到七億(700000000)!
而這些,還只是機率上的誤判所造成的冤獄而已,如果有檢察官刻意抱著 “教訓”無辜被告的心態,(例如朱朝亮檢察官在被今週刊訪問時說的,詳見立即停止濫權羈押一文),那麼冤獄將更多,冤獄造成的外部成本也更大. 要改善司法,從落實向怠職司法人員求償冤獄賠償(即"外部成本內部化")開始吧!
備註:
1) DG看了之後提出一個蠻好的觀點. 檢察官的責任如果在起訴, 那麼很有可能檢察官的預設立場是被告有罪,也可能因此造成檢察官濫押的行為(目前台灣看來的確如此). 不過即便如此,冤獄的認定要到了法官判決官司定讞之後確定無罪,那麼之前不必要的羈押部分方可申請所謂的冤獄補償.在無罪推論的前提下,法官的預設立場應該是被告=無罪的.回到完全就機率來看,以表格所舉的例子來講冤獄的可能性還是5%.
2) 既然檢察官的預設立場可能是被告=有罪(上表中藍色),那麼濫押的行為可能很浮濫,如此一來冤獄可能高達20%,那麼就更應該落實冤獄賠償由怠職司法人員付出的政策,使濫押的外部成本可以內部化.關於這次警察執法過當甚至違法侵害人權,我贊成受害者提告,但我反對提出國賠.我曾經和朋友激烈辯論這個部分. 除了法律上的差異, 我反對提出國家賠償原因也正在此. 國家賠償的正是警察行為的外部成本由全體大眾買單;相反的提告相關警察才可以迫使執法者造成的外部成本內部化.否則警察也會和濫押的檢察官一樣,繼續怠職與濫權而已.
[1] 詳見曾肇昌: 冤獄要賠償
-----------
延伸閱讀:
走鋼索的民主
立即停止濫權羈押
轉載: 國際特赦組織 籲台灣警察勿濫用暴力
參加研討會前記: 惱人的撘便車(free rider)問題
4/16/2009:
黃東熊︰不修法 馬下台也可能被押(4/12/2009)
裡面提到一些數據: "警察大學教授黃炎東則從數據比較德國和台灣羈押原因，他說德國雖也有「湮滅罪證」、「重罪」等羈押事由，但兩者被法官裁准收押比例共約為三％，至於較不具爭議的羈押事由「逃亡」為九十七％，但台灣「湮滅罪證」和「重罪」的裁押比率為四十七％，「預防性羈押」為二十四％，「逃亡」為二十九％，顯見羈押事由不當使用。"
如果有數據顯示這些預防性羈押的案子結果是錯押, 那就造成很多可以申請冤獄賠償的案件(國賠), 浪費資源, 應該早日落實司法改革,特別是濫押成本內部化!
added on 4/21/2009:
46萬換冤獄、破產http://taiwantt.org.tw/taiwanimpression/2009/20090104-10.htm96.07.11 總統令：修正「冤獄賠償法」http://www.hcbara.org.tw/xp02_03.htm
==updated on 10/5/2010==
抗議陳雲林 遭警打傷者 還有人要爭國賠 比照江一德案索賠: 這是事情最新的發展. 完全應驗我之前的擔心. 雖然表面上國賠獲准,但是之前控告警方濫權的案子卻不成立. 警方濫權的外部性完全由國賠吸收,再加上刑事法部分不成立,怎麼能夠解決外部性的問題呢?
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
去過和想去的地方
懺悔一下,外面下雪不想去上課.等公車可是很冷的勒....
沒去上課,開始玩剛剛發現的地圖工具(create your own visited country map or check our Venice travel guide).
第一個是去過的國家: 好像和我部落格訪客地圖分佈蠻類似的啊...
(美國)去過的州: States I visited .......ㄟ 29個,有幾個是搬家時開車經過而已,不算真的玩到. 而且最想去的兩個(緬因州和阿拉斯加)都還沒去過 : (
走過的歐洲國家:Eu countries I have been to....9個(17%) . 好幾個想去的也是都還沒機會去....
再來是希望和DG一起去玩或是度假的地方..... 美國就不算了. 套句DG說的,美國是當作後花園在散步啦,不能算度假....
做完白日夢了,雪還沒停. 新玩具也沒到手, 以前的officemate還打電話來問: 你今天怎麼這麼早回家......真是漫長的一天啊!
沒去上課,開始玩剛剛發現的地圖工具(create your own visited country map or check our Venice travel guide).
第一個是去過的國家: 好像和我部落格訪客地圖分佈蠻類似的啊...
(美國)去過的州: States I visited .......ㄟ 29個,有幾個是搬家時開車經過而已,不算真的玩到. 而且最想去的兩個(緬因州和阿拉斯加)都還沒去過 : (
走過的歐洲國家:Eu countries I have been to....9個(17%) . 好幾個想去的也是都還沒機會去....
再來是希望和DG一起去玩或是度假的地方..... 美國就不算了. 套句DG說的,美國是當作後花園在散步啦,不能算度假....
做完白日夢了,雪還沒停. 新玩具也沒到手, 以前的officemate還打電話來問: 你今天怎麼這麼早回家......真是漫長的一天啊!
Saturday, November 8, 2008
IFJ譴責台灣警察攻擊紀錄片製作者 IFJ Condemns Police Attack on Documentary Maker in Taiwan
(原文在此)IFJ Condemns Police Attack on Documentary Maker in Taiwan
試譯如下:
The International Federation of Journalists condemns a violent attack on an independent documentary film maker by police in Taipei yesterday.
國際記者協會(IFJ)譴責獨立紀錄片製作者受到台灣警察暴力攻擊
According to the Association of Taiwan Journalists (ATJ), an IFJ affiliate, documentary film maker Chen Yu-ching was set upon by police after filming protests on November 4 at the Grand Hotel, Taipei, over the visit of a mainland China government envoy.
根據台灣記者協會(ATJ),國際記協分會,獨立紀錄片製作者(台灣是翻成公民記者,我照原文翻成獨立紀錄片製作者)陳育青在十一月四日於台北圓山飯店拍攝群眾抗議中國特使陳雲林之後被押至警察局盤問.
A group of police officers reportedly forced her into a police vehicle and detained her for over an hour at Yuanshan Precinct police station, after she refused to produce her identification.在她拒絕出示身分證件後, 一群警察強迫將其押進警車內並留置於圓山派出所超過一小時
The ATJ reports that Chen sustained heavy bruising in several places and was later examined in hospital to rule out serious injury.
台灣記協表示陳育青身上多處瘀傷, 赴醫院檢查後證實無大礙
The visit of the envoy from mainland China to meet with negotiators from Taiwan’s government has sparked protests at the Grand Hotel and elsewhere in Taipei, prompting a heavy police presence.
陳雲林來台後在圓山飯店與台北其他多處爆發衝突, 台北市警局也於多處重力部署警察.
Chen was reportedly visiting a friend in the vicinity when she saw the protesters and began filming. Chen said that many others were also taking photographs and filming.
據報導陳育青於附近拜訪友人時看到示威抗議而開始拍攝這些抗議的影片. 陳表示當時還有其他多人也在現場照相或攝影.
“This violent attack raises grave concerns for independent reporting in Taiwan,” said IFJ Asia-Pacific.國際記協對暴力攻擊表示憂心台灣的獨立報導.
“There can be no excuse for this kind of heavy-handed interference in reporting.””沒有任何藉口可以合理解釋這種暴力干預”國際記協表示
The IFJ joins the ATJ in condemning the police attack on Chen and demands an immediate investigation into this interference in Taiwan’s media.
國際記協與台灣記協[1]同聲譴責警察攻擊陳育青,並要求應立即展開調查對台灣媒體的不當干預.
For further information contact IFJ Asia-Pacific on +612 9333 0919
----------
[1]台灣記協的譴責聲明在此
延伸閱讀:
2008.11.04 圓山飯店 警察侵犯人權事件記錄 ◎陳育青 (這裡提到為什麼拒絕出示證件)
溫哥華太陽報對於近期馬政府的種種行為所做出的評論(中譯), Detentions in Taiwan spark fears of return to authoritarian approach(原文).
試譯如下:
The International Federation of Journalists condemns a violent attack on an independent documentary film maker by police in Taipei yesterday.
國際記者協會(IFJ)譴責獨立紀錄片製作者受到台灣警察暴力攻擊
According to the Association of Taiwan Journalists (ATJ), an IFJ affiliate, documentary film maker Chen Yu-ching was set upon by police after filming protests on November 4 at the Grand Hotel, Taipei, over the visit of a mainland China government envoy.
根據台灣記者協會(ATJ),國際記協分會,獨立紀錄片製作者(台灣是翻成公民記者,我照原文翻成獨立紀錄片製作者)陳育青在十一月四日於台北圓山飯店拍攝群眾抗議中國特使陳雲林之後被押至警察局盤問.
A group of police officers reportedly forced her into a police vehicle and detained her for over an hour at Yuanshan Precinct police station, after she refused to produce her identification.在她拒絕出示身分證件後, 一群警察強迫將其押進警車內並留置於圓山派出所超過一小時
The ATJ reports that Chen sustained heavy bruising in several places and was later examined in hospital to rule out serious injury.
台灣記協表示陳育青身上多處瘀傷, 赴醫院檢查後證實無大礙
The visit of the envoy from mainland China to meet with negotiators from Taiwan’s government has sparked protests at the Grand Hotel and elsewhere in Taipei, prompting a heavy police presence.
陳雲林來台後在圓山飯店與台北其他多處爆發衝突, 台北市警局也於多處重力部署警察.
Chen was reportedly visiting a friend in the vicinity when she saw the protesters and began filming. Chen said that many others were also taking photographs and filming.
據報導陳育青於附近拜訪友人時看到示威抗議而開始拍攝這些抗議的影片. 陳表示當時還有其他多人也在現場照相或攝影.
“This violent attack raises grave concerns for independent reporting in Taiwan,” said IFJ Asia-Pacific.國際記協對暴力攻擊表示憂心台灣的獨立報導.
“There can be no excuse for this kind of heavy-handed interference in reporting.””沒有任何藉口可以合理解釋這種暴力干預”國際記協表示
The IFJ joins the ATJ in condemning the police attack on Chen and demands an immediate investigation into this interference in Taiwan’s media.
國際記協與台灣記協[1]同聲譴責警察攻擊陳育青,並要求應立即展開調查對台灣媒體的不當干預.
For further information contact IFJ Asia-Pacific on +612 9333 0919
----------
[1]台灣記協的譴責聲明在此
延伸閱讀:
2008.11.04 圓山飯店 警察侵犯人權事件記錄 ◎陳育青 (這裡提到為什麼拒絕出示證件)
溫哥華太陽報對於近期馬政府的種種行為所做出的評論(中譯), Detentions in Taiwan spark fears of return to authoritarian approach(原文).
Friday, November 7, 2008
[轉載]王清峰：馬總統以身作則 司法獨立現契機 【00:15】
今天(11/7)看到這新聞, 邊看邊笑. 不知道是不是王部長在回應日前這篇由美國學者發表的聲明: 美友人連署 關切台灣司法公平啊!? 這麼有趣的新聞,趕快貼出來讓大家一起笑笑,心情會好一點!
-----------
王清峰：馬總統以身作則 司法獨立現契機 【00:15】(原文出處)
〔中央社〕法務部長王清峰今天表示，總統馬英九以身作則，對維護司法獨立有決心，這是推動司法獨立非常重要的契機，她期勉所有檢察官能把握機會。王清峰還期許檢察官能夠「富貴不能移、貧賤不能移、威武不能屈」。(的確,一直到最近才收到國際關切台灣司法公平性的問題,的確是非常重要的契機啊!)
王清峰出席高檢署與社團法人中華民國檢察官協會共同主辦的「如何確保檢察權的獨立與中立」研討會致詞時說，只要司法能夠獨立那麼就會中立；從最近馬總統以身作則的言行，可以看出馬總統維護司法獨立的決心。 (例如說,縱容警察違法為憲,如毀損國旗等,都是馬先生以身作則的最佳例子.其實王部長貴人多忘事,馬先生自當台北市長起就已經不尊重國旗了,那時就立下最佳典範,今由警察發揚光大)
最好的尊重」，馬總統她表示，馬總統說「司法不能對領導人投降」、「相信檢調辦案，就是對司法與調查局長吳瑛談話時還說，「如果有拿到我家人犯罪情資，不用告訴我」，就連最高檢察署特偵組辦案狀況，馬總統都是從報上才知道的。(是啊,馬先生的口頭禪之一就是看報紙才知道,其二就是謝謝指教,三是我把你們當人看,其四是....族繁不及備載啦)
王清峰指出，馬總統用語言與行動來捍衛司法獨立，讓我們看到一個對於捍衛司法獨立不容置疑的總統；如果推動廉能政治，但是領導人不知潔身自愛，下面就一定會「歪哥」，現在有個不一樣的領導人，對司法獨立來說是個契機。(不一樣的意思是說,馬先生不用考試,就可以直接是律師了. 大家要效法用獨立的方法拿到律師,不要笨笨的去考那個很難考的律師資格考嗎?王部長你要開示清楚點嘛!至於怎麼拿到的? 請看此. )
同時，王清峰也期勉檢察官，不能夠只期待外部改變，還要看檢察體系自己如何捍衛獨立、中立、尊嚴以及形象。檢察官要能做到「富貴不能移、貧賤不能移、威武不能屈」，雖然相當不容易，但值得成為目標。(這個中立應該是在回應美國學者的聲明吧? 中立不是自己講的吧! ........喔,抱歉抱歉,美國批評的是台灣司法公正性,不是檢察體系的中立性. 抱歉,我中文太差,應該向王部長等人多學習)
她希望檢察官的生活要單純、要守法、通情達理與合群；對國會、媒體與人民的監督，則應該抱持著感謝的態度。尤其是對媒體部分，王清峰認為，如果沒有媒體平台，檢察體系的意見將無法傳達，也無法知道社會不同角落有不同意見，因此，對媒體要抱持感謝的態度，讓檢察體系的意見可以傳達出去，雖然可能有錯，卻也才有機會將正確的訊息傳達出去。 (這個也是在回應那個批評啦. 就是回應當中批評台灣司法有媒體辦案的現象，現在說了，媒體辦案在台灣有其必要性啦!而且就算有錯,還是要繼續照媒體辦案下去啦.......ㄟ 那媒體造假的部分呢?)
-----------
王清峰：馬總統以身作則 司法獨立現契機 【00:15】(原文出處)
〔中央社〕法務部長王清峰今天表示，總統馬英九以身作則，對維護司法獨立有決心，這是推動司法獨立非常重要的契機，她期勉所有檢察官能把握機會。王清峰還期許檢察官能夠「富貴不能移、貧賤不能移、威武不能屈」。(的確,一直到最近才收到國際關切台灣司法公平性的問題,的確是非常重要的契機啊!)
王清峰出席高檢署與社團法人中華民國檢察官協會共同主辦的「如何確保檢察權的獨立與中立」研討會致詞時說，只要司法能夠獨立那麼就會中立；從最近馬總統以身作則的言行，可以看出馬總統維護司法獨立的決心。 (例如說,縱容警察違法為憲,如毀損國旗等,都是馬先生以身作則的最佳例子.其實王部長貴人多忘事,馬先生自當台北市長起就已經不尊重國旗了,那時就立下最佳典範,今由警察發揚光大)
最好的尊重」，馬總統她表示，馬總統說「司法不能對領導人投降」、「相信檢調辦案，就是對司法與調查局長吳瑛談話時還說，「如果有拿到我家人犯罪情資，不用告訴我」，就連最高檢察署特偵組辦案狀況，馬總統都是從報上才知道的。(是啊,馬先生的口頭禪之一就是看報紙才知道,其二就是謝謝指教,三是我把你們當人看,其四是....族繁不及備載啦)
王清峰指出，馬總統用語言與行動來捍衛司法獨立，讓我們看到一個對於捍衛司法獨立不容置疑的總統；如果推動廉能政治，但是領導人不知潔身自愛，下面就一定會「歪哥」，現在有個不一樣的領導人，對司法獨立來說是個契機。(不一樣的意思是說,馬先生不用考試,就可以直接是律師了. 大家要效法用獨立的方法拿到律師,不要笨笨的去考那個很難考的律師資格考嗎?王部長你要開示清楚點嘛!至於怎麼拿到的? 請看此. )
同時，王清峰也期勉檢察官，不能夠只期待外部改變，還要看檢察體系自己如何捍衛獨立、中立、尊嚴以及形象。檢察官要能做到「富貴不能移、貧賤不能移、威武不能屈」，雖然相當不容易，但值得成為目標。(這個中立應該是在回應美國學者的聲明吧? 中立不是自己講的吧! ........喔,抱歉抱歉,美國批評的是台灣司法公正性,不是檢察體系的中立性. 抱歉,我中文太差,應該向王部長等人多學習)
她希望檢察官的生活要單純、要守法、通情達理與合群；對國會、媒體與人民的監督，則應該抱持著感謝的態度。尤其是對媒體部分，王清峰認為，如果沒有媒體平台，檢察體系的意見將無法傳達，也無法知道社會不同角落有不同意見，因此，對媒體要抱持感謝的態度，讓檢察體系的意見可以傳達出去，雖然可能有錯，卻也才有機會將正確的訊息傳達出去。 (這個也是在回應那個批評啦. 就是回應當中批評台灣司法有媒體辦案的現象，現在說了，媒體辦案在台灣有其必要性啦!而且就算有錯,還是要繼續照媒體辦案下去啦.......ㄟ 那媒體造假的部分呢?)
一個聯想...兼答"人民幹麻要去抗議,抗麻要帶相機"(revised)
有些朋友在譴責警方暴力的同時問我說, "人民也有錯啦! 幹麻要去抗議?幹麻要帶相機?"
這個講法聽起來對我來說就好像有婦女晚上回家不幸遇到色狼被強暴,,暫時先想成輪夜班後要下班的護士好了,然後法官開庭還問: "你幹麻輪夜班? 你幹麻穿著(合身的)護士服裝,經過有色狼的地方啊?"
人民有行動自由言論自由等,不管警察維安為什麼過當,或是為什麼沒有封鎖線還擾民,質問民眾幹麻要經過或是要去表達意見的本身就是可笑的.這就和婦女夜歸被強暴,就算將色狼定罪,但質問婦女為什麼要輪夜班(不會只輪白天班喔)? 為什麼要穿制服直接下班(不換上寬鬆輕便甚至化妝把自己化醜一點)才回家嗎一樣的莫名其妙.
我猜想這些人要嘛沒有獨立思考能力, 要嘛自以為清高,所以左右各打50大板,想顯示自己之中立性,但其實就像我的聯想,這樣的批評或問話,不但讓人無言,還可見奴性之嚴重,所以不管人民自由本是憲法之保障,自甘放棄不講還怪別人或質問別人為什麼不放棄.
-----------
有人說, 民眾不可以帶石頭等襲警
沿用這個聯想--
因為知道要輪夜班,這名護士帶了防狼噴霧器等, 當她被強暴前,她拿出噴霧器拼命抵抗,但是還是不敵強暴犯的暴力. 此時法官問: 你怎麼可以對防狼噴霧器呢? 你怎麼可以噴色狼呢? (難道要乖乖被強暴嗎?)
我認為如果是第一場抗議就預帶石頭,只要沒用都是合法的. 如果是第一場警察還沒抓狂前就丟石頭等襲警那就不對了.
(爲了防止有人繼續頭腦想不清來鬧. 把反過來的情況也寫出來好了.)
還是一樣的類比:
色狼帶了保險套,還帶了情趣用品用暴力強破被強暴的婦女就範,而且還要婦女使用那些情趣用品幫自己. 法院上色狼說: 我有用保險套耶,是為了保護她喔! 而且我用情趣用品也是因為她一付不爽樣,而且還用防狼噴霧器噴我, 這樣我怎麼辦事? 只好用情趣用品幫助自己啊. 所以強暴無罪. 更甚者,強暴完還對婦女說, 我沒做錯啊,誰叫她剛好要在我一時性起的時候下班回家經過此地啊,歡迎你去告啊!
這就和警察對人民說,你沒犯法,我強迫把你帶走是為了保護你一樣可笑;和警察對民眾說民眾反抗只好用打的讓民眾就範一樣. 警察並且堅持立場,認為沒有違法,並且歡迎民眾與店家去告,如李XX.
----------
note:
會想到這個聯想是因為一件過去事.
我還在台灣唸書的時候曾經發生一件社會事件. 年代有點久遠,不記得細節,不過基本上就是四個大學生一女三男一起上陽明山去夜遊.不幸遇到歹徒一時性起攻擊(記得是拿刀子之類)三男之後打算強暴那一女. 歹徒頗變態要求該女子先用嘴巴當前戲,該女子趁機咬斷歹徒的命根子,歹徒大痛時其他三男脫困並且把歹徒揍了一頓後合力將原本捆住自己的繩子反捆歹徒,並將歹徒關在後車廂後下山報警求救. 歹徒後來還控告該女子與其他三名男子傷害.我已經忘了後來這四人是否被認為自衛過當,印象中沒有. 不過自此又過一陣子後才有一些防色狼的工具. 難道說知道要夜歸而帶這些工具是錯的嗎?
這個講法聽起來對我來說就好像有婦女晚上回家不幸遇到色狼被強暴,,暫時先想成輪夜班後要下班的護士好了,然後法官開庭還問: "你幹麻輪夜班? 你幹麻穿著(合身的)護士服裝,經過有色狼的地方啊?"
人民有行動自由言論自由等,不管警察維安為什麼過當,或是為什麼沒有封鎖線還擾民,質問民眾幹麻要經過或是要去表達意見的本身就是可笑的.這就和婦女夜歸被強暴,就算將色狼定罪,但質問婦女為什麼要輪夜班(不會只輪白天班喔)? 為什麼要穿制服直接下班(不換上寬鬆輕便甚至化妝把自己化醜一點)才回家嗎一樣的莫名其妙.
我猜想這些人要嘛沒有獨立思考能力, 要嘛自以為清高,所以左右各打50大板,想顯示自己之中立性,但其實就像我的聯想,這樣的批評或問話,不但讓人無言,還可見奴性之嚴重,所以不管人民自由本是憲法之保障,自甘放棄不講還怪別人或質問別人為什麼不放棄.
-----------
有人說, 民眾不可以帶石頭等襲警
沿用這個聯想--
因為知道要輪夜班,這名護士帶了防狼噴霧器等, 當她被強暴前,她拿出噴霧器拼命抵抗,但是還是不敵強暴犯的暴力. 此時法官問: 你怎麼可以對防狼噴霧器呢? 你怎麼可以噴色狼呢? (難道要乖乖被強暴嗎?)
我認為如果是第一場抗議就預帶石頭,只要沒用都是合法的. 如果是第一場警察還沒抓狂前就丟石頭等襲警那就不對了.
(爲了防止有人繼續頭腦想不清來鬧. 把反過來的情況也寫出來好了.)
還是一樣的類比:
色狼帶了保險套,還帶了情趣用品用暴力強破被強暴的婦女就範,而且還要婦女使用那些情趣用品幫自己. 法院上色狼說: 我有用保險套耶,是為了保護她喔! 而且我用情趣用品也是因為她一付不爽樣,而且還用防狼噴霧器噴我, 這樣我怎麼辦事? 只好用情趣用品幫助自己啊. 所以強暴無罪. 更甚者,強暴完還對婦女說, 我沒做錯啊,誰叫她剛好要在我一時性起的時候下班回家經過此地啊,歡迎你去告啊!
這就和警察對人民說,你沒犯法,我強迫把你帶走是為了保護你一樣可笑;和警察對民眾說民眾反抗只好用打的讓民眾就範一樣. 警察並且堅持立場,認為沒有違法,並且歡迎民眾與店家去告,如李XX.
----------
note:
會想到這個聯想是因為一件過去事.
我還在台灣唸書的時候曾經發生一件社會事件. 年代有點久遠,不記得細節,不過基本上就是四個大學生一女三男一起上陽明山去夜遊.不幸遇到歹徒一時性起攻擊(記得是拿刀子之類)三男之後打算強暴那一女. 歹徒頗變態要求該女子先用嘴巴當前戲,該女子趁機咬斷歹徒的命根子,歹徒大痛時其他三男脫困並且把歹徒揍了一頓後合力將原本捆住自己的繩子反捆歹徒,並將歹徒關在後車廂後下山報警求救. 歹徒後來還控告該女子與其他三名男子傷害.我已經忘了後來這四人是否被認為自衛過當,印象中沒有. 不過自此又過一陣子後才有一些防色狼的工具. 難道說知道要夜歸而帶這些工具是錯的嗎?
Thursday, November 6, 2008
Dear Visitors, If I Have Told You....親愛的訪客, 如果我曾告訴你......
網路上已經有太多警察暴力的影片. 我不想再加了.多看只是多心痛,多悲憤而已. 就在這幾天,連橫跨校園的自由都沒有. 台大資工的教授因此留一詩抗議. 標題是我加的, 原文出自此,我試譯如下[1]:
------------
by Dr. Chi-Sheng (Daniel) Shih
Dear Visitors,The site is taken down as a way to humbly protest the lost of freedom of speech and Liberty in Taiwan.
親愛的訪客, 這個地方即日起關閉已示我個人最卑微的一種示威抗議.抗議台灣失去曾有的言論自由與自主. ....
If I have told you that Taiwan government works very hard to protect her people, I take it back. 如果我曾告訴你,台灣政府戮力保護人民,我現在收回那句話;
If I have told you that Taiwan is a democratic society, I take it back.
如果我曾告訴你,台灣是個民主社會,我只好收回那句話;
If I have told you that we can always complain the President in public, I take it back.
如果我曾告訴你,我們可以公開批評我們的總統,我不得不收回那句話;
If I have told you that Taiwan is a nice place to visit, I take it back.
最後,如果我也曾告訴你,台灣是個可愛可以拜訪的國家, 我還是只能收回那句話.
Very soon, visiting Taiwan will just experience what you have in Mainland China.
因為很快的,拜訪台灣將和拜訪中國一樣不安全,不民主,沒有言論自由,而且不可愛友善
------
[1] 昨天(11/6)與原作者取得連絡,得到他許可.特別感謝原作者大方出借此詩.
------------
by Dr. Chi-Sheng (Daniel) Shih
Dear Visitors,The site is taken down as a way to humbly protest the lost of freedom of speech and Liberty in Taiwan.
親愛的訪客, 這個地方即日起關閉已示我個人最卑微的一種示威抗議.抗議台灣失去曾有的言論自由與自主. ....
If I have told you that Taiwan government works very hard to protect her people, I take it back. 如果我曾告訴你,台灣政府戮力保護人民,我現在收回那句話;
If I have told you that Taiwan is a democratic society, I take it back.
如果我曾告訴你,台灣是個民主社會,我只好收回那句話;
If I have told you that we can always complain the President in public, I take it back.
如果我曾告訴你,我們可以公開批評我們的總統,我不得不收回那句話;
If I have told you that Taiwan is a nice place to visit, I take it back.
最後,如果我也曾告訴你,台灣是個可愛可以拜訪的國家, 我還是只能收回那句話.
Very soon, visiting Taiwan will just experience what you have in Mainland China.
因為很快的,拜訪台灣將和拜訪中國一樣不安全,不民主,沒有言論自由,而且不可愛友善
------
[1] 昨天(11/6)與原作者取得連絡,得到他許可.特別感謝原作者大方出借此詩.
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
(轉載) 美友人連署 關切台灣司法公平
台灣的司法與民主, 一個傾斜不中立, 一個倒退. 司法與民主是一體的,一個受到侵害,另一個也必將不保.我之前已提過,民主是天賦民權的展現,是自由受到法律的保障.之前是新聞自由受到國際IFJ指責政府危害新聞自由,現在是司法公平性遭到國際學者的懷疑. 公平性的疑慮之下, 加上前幾天台灣民眾人權受到侵害,就算已經走上法律途徑,沒有公平的司法又真能夠還給民眾多少公道呢?
台灣的司法與民主相繼受到國際的關切,這才是真的傷害台灣國際形象. (號稱有國際觀的內閣,果然短期內就讓台灣丟臉國際,所以,請不要再說馬政府無能了)
------------
(轉載) 原文在此:
November 4, 2008
JOINT STATEMENT US, European and Australian scholars and writers express concern about prosecutions in TaiwanThe undersigned, scholars and writers from the US, Europe and Australia wish to express their deep concern about the recent series of detentions in Taiwan of present and former DPP government officials. To date there have been at least seven such cases (See list below).
以下聯署的國際學者對於近日台灣政府一連串拘留卸任與現任民進黨政府官員的行動，深表憂慮。直至今日，據我們瞭解共有七件類似案件。
It is obvious that there have been cases of corruption in Taiwan, but these have occurred in both political camps. The political neutrality of the judicial system is an essential element in a democracy. It is also essential that any accused are considered innocent until proven guilty in the court of law.
很明顯的，貪污這個問題在台灣依然存在，但是這樣的案例在兩大政黨裡均曾發生。司法系統維持政治中立是民主的基本要素。堅持任何被指控者在裁定有罪前均是無罪的法律理念也是必要的。
We also believe that the procedures followed by the prosecutor's offices are severely flawed: while one or two of the accused have been formally charged, the majority is being held incommunicado without being charged. This is a severe contravention of the writ of habeas corpus and a basic violation of due process, justice and the rule of law.
我們認為檢察官所採取的法律程序有著嚴重的缺失：雖然當一、兩位被指控者已被正式起訴時，大多數被指控者卻在未被正式起訴情況之下就遭到收押禁見。這嚴重違反了人身保護令以及正當法律程序、公義與法治。
In the meantime, the prosecutor's offices evidently leak detrimental information to the press. This kind of "trial by press" is a violation of the basic standards of judicial procedures. It also gives the distinct impression that the Kuomintang authorities are using the judicial system to get even with members of the former DPP government. In addition, the people who are being held incommunicado are of course unable to defend themselves against the misreporting and the leaks in the news media.
在此同時，檢察官辦公室很明顯地將相關不利消息透露給媒體。這種「透過媒體辦案」的方式違反司法程序的基本標準；也讓外界認為國民黨政府利用司法系統來報復已下台的民進黨政府。此外，被收押禁見的人，在與外界斷絕聯繫的情況下，無法澄清外界不實報導與媒體洩密。
We do firmly believe that any alleged wrongdoings must be dealt with in a fair and open manner in an impartial court. Justice through the rule of law is essential to Taiwan's efforts to consolidate democracy and protect fundamental human rights.
我們深信任何宣稱的犯罪行為應該以公正與公開的方式，在中立的法庭裡審判。透過法治落實司法，才能強化台灣民主與保障基本人權。
We do not want to see Taiwan's hard-earned democracy jeopardized in this manner. Taiwan can justifiably be proud of its transition to democracy in the late 1980s and early 1990s. It would be sad for Taiwan and detrimental to its international image if the progress which was made during the past 20 years would be erased. Taiwan needs to move forward, not backwards to the unfair and unjust procedures as practiced during the dark days of Martial Law (1947-87).
我們不願見到台灣辛苦得來的民主陷入如此困境。台灣因為在八零年代後期與九零年早期成功轉型為民主國家，而引以為傲。如果過去二十年來的民主進展從此抺煞，這不僅將令人難過，台灣的國際形象也將受到嚴害傷害。台灣必須向前邁進，而不應是開倒車回到過去戒嚴黑暗時代的不公與不義。
Signed:
簽署人：
Nat Bellocchi, former Chairman of the American Institute in TaiwanJulian Baum, former Taiwan Bureau Chief, Far Eastern Economic Review
Coen Blaauw, Formosan Association for Public Affairs, Washington DCDavid Prager Branner, Director at Large (East Asia), American Oriental SocietyGordon G. Chang, author, "The Coming Collapse of China."June Teufel Dreyer, Professor of Political Science, University of Miami, FloridaEdward Friedman, Professor of Political Science and East Asian Studies, University of Wisconsin, MadisonBruce Jacobs, Professor of Asian Languages and Studies, Monash University, Melbourne, AustraliaRichard C. Kagan, Professor Emeritus of History, Hamline University, St. Paul MinnesotaJerome F. Keating, Associate Professor, National Taipei University (Ret.). Author, "Island in the Stream, a quick case study of Taiwan's complex history" and other works on TaiwanDaniel Lynch, Associate Professor, School of International Relations, University of Southern CaliforniaVictor H. Mair, Professor of Chinese Language and Literature, University of PennsylvaniaDonald Rodgers, Associate Professor of Political Science, Austin College, TexasTerence Russell, Professor of Chinese Language and Literature, University of ManitobaScott Simon, Professor of Sociology and Anthropology, University of OttawaJohn J. Tkacik Jr., Senior Research Fellow, The Heritage Foundation, Washington DC
Gerrit van der Wees, Editor Taiwan Communiqué, Washington DC
Vincent Wei-cheng Wang, Professor of Political Science, University of Richmond, VirginiaArthur Waldron, Lauder Professor of International Relations, University of PennsylvaniaStephen Yates, President of DC Asia Advisory and former Deputy Assistant to the Vice President for National Security Affairs
---------------------------------------------------------------
Specific cases of concern:
-- The arrest and detention on October 15th of former Interior minister Yu Cheng-hsien;
-- The arrest and detention on October 27th of former Hsinchu Science Park Director and Deputy Minister of Environmental Protection Dr. James Lee;
-- The arrest and detention on October 29th of DPP Chiayi County Commissioner Chen Ming-wen;
-- The indictment on October 30th of DPP Tainan City Councilor Wang Ting-yu;
-- The arrest and detention on October 31st of former National Security Council (NSC) secretary-general and Deputy Prime Minister Chiou I-jen;
-- The questioning of former Foreign Minister Dr. Mark Chen on November 3rd and insinuations in the press that he might be charged and arrested.
-- The arrest and detention on November 4th of DPP Yunlin County Magistrate Ms. Su Chih-fen.
---------
延伸閱讀:
美友人連署 關切台灣司法公平 (自由時報)
加拿大人權協會將馬英九政府列入觀察名單(英文)
連署(英文): http://www.thepetitionsite.com/10/--if-gte-mso-9xml-wworddocument-wviewnormalwview-wzoom0wzoom-wpunctuationkerning
台灣的司法與民主相繼受到國際的關切,這才是真的傷害台灣國際形象. (號稱有國際觀的內閣,果然短期內就讓台灣丟臉國際,所以,請不要再說馬政府無能了)
------------
(轉載) 原文在此:
November 4, 2008
JOINT STATEMENT US, European and Australian scholars and writers express concern about prosecutions in TaiwanThe undersigned, scholars and writers from the US, Europe and Australia wish to express their deep concern about the recent series of detentions in Taiwan of present and former DPP government officials. To date there have been at least seven such cases (See list below).
以下聯署的國際學者對於近日台灣政府一連串拘留卸任與現任民進黨政府官員的行動，深表憂慮。直至今日，據我們瞭解共有七件類似案件。
It is obvious that there have been cases of corruption in Taiwan, but these have occurred in both political camps. The political neutrality of the judicial system is an essential element in a democracy. It is also essential that any accused are considered innocent until proven guilty in the court of law.
很明顯的，貪污這個問題在台灣依然存在，但是這樣的案例在兩大政黨裡均曾發生。司法系統維持政治中立是民主的基本要素。堅持任何被指控者在裁定有罪前均是無罪的法律理念也是必要的。
We also believe that the procedures followed by the prosecutor's offices are severely flawed: while one or two of the accused have been formally charged, the majority is being held incommunicado without being charged. This is a severe contravention of the writ of habeas corpus and a basic violation of due process, justice and the rule of law.
我們認為檢察官所採取的法律程序有著嚴重的缺失：雖然當一、兩位被指控者已被正式起訴時，大多數被指控者卻在未被正式起訴情況之下就遭到收押禁見。這嚴重違反了人身保護令以及正當法律程序、公義與法治。
In the meantime, the prosecutor's offices evidently leak detrimental information to the press. This kind of "trial by press" is a violation of the basic standards of judicial procedures. It also gives the distinct impression that the Kuomintang authorities are using the judicial system to get even with members of the former DPP government. In addition, the people who are being held incommunicado are of course unable to defend themselves against the misreporting and the leaks in the news media.
在此同時，檢察官辦公室很明顯地將相關不利消息透露給媒體。這種「透過媒體辦案」的方式違反司法程序的基本標準；也讓外界認為國民黨政府利用司法系統來報復已下台的民進黨政府。此外，被收押禁見的人，在與外界斷絕聯繫的情況下，無法澄清外界不實報導與媒體洩密。
We do firmly believe that any alleged wrongdoings must be dealt with in a fair and open manner in an impartial court. Justice through the rule of law is essential to Taiwan's efforts to consolidate democracy and protect fundamental human rights.
我們深信任何宣稱的犯罪行為應該以公正與公開的方式，在中立的法庭裡審判。透過法治落實司法，才能強化台灣民主與保障基本人權。
We do not want to see Taiwan's hard-earned democracy jeopardized in this manner. Taiwan can justifiably be proud of its transition to democracy in the late 1980s and early 1990s. It would be sad for Taiwan and detrimental to its international image if the progress which was made during the past 20 years would be erased. Taiwan needs to move forward, not backwards to the unfair and unjust procedures as practiced during the dark days of Martial Law (1947-87).
我們不願見到台灣辛苦得來的民主陷入如此困境。台灣因為在八零年代後期與九零年早期成功轉型為民主國家，而引以為傲。如果過去二十年來的民主進展從此抺煞，這不僅將令人難過，台灣的國際形象也將受到嚴害傷害。台灣必須向前邁進，而不應是開倒車回到過去戒嚴黑暗時代的不公與不義。
Signed:
簽署人：
Nat Bellocchi, former Chairman of the American Institute in TaiwanJulian Baum, former Taiwan Bureau Chief, Far Eastern Economic Review
Coen Blaauw, Formosan Association for Public Affairs, Washington DCDavid Prager Branner, Director at Large (East Asia), American Oriental SocietyGordon G. Chang, author, "The Coming Collapse of China."June Teufel Dreyer, Professor of Political Science, University of Miami, FloridaEdward Friedman, Professor of Political Science and East Asian Studies, University of Wisconsin, MadisonBruce Jacobs, Professor of Asian Languages and Studies, Monash University, Melbourne, AustraliaRichard C. Kagan, Professor Emeritus of History, Hamline University, St. Paul MinnesotaJerome F. Keating, Associate Professor, National Taipei University (Ret.). Author, "Island in the Stream, a quick case study of Taiwan's complex history" and other works on TaiwanDaniel Lynch, Associate Professor, School of International Relations, University of Southern CaliforniaVictor H. Mair, Professor of Chinese Language and Literature, University of PennsylvaniaDonald Rodgers, Associate Professor of Political Science, Austin College, TexasTerence Russell, Professor of Chinese Language and Literature, University of ManitobaScott Simon, Professor of Sociology and Anthropology, University of OttawaJohn J. Tkacik Jr., Senior Research Fellow, The Heritage Foundation, Washington DC
Gerrit van der Wees, Editor Taiwan Communiqué, Washington DC
Vincent Wei-cheng Wang, Professor of Political Science, University of Richmond, VirginiaArthur Waldron, Lauder Professor of International Relations, University of PennsylvaniaStephen Yates, President of DC Asia Advisory and former Deputy Assistant to the Vice President for National Security Affairs
---------------------------------------------------------------
Specific cases of concern:
-- The arrest and detention on October 15th of former Interior minister Yu Cheng-hsien;
-- The arrest and detention on October 27th of former Hsinchu Science Park Director and Deputy Minister of Environmental Protection Dr. James Lee;
-- The arrest and detention on October 29th of DPP Chiayi County Commissioner Chen Ming-wen;
-- The indictment on October 30th of DPP Tainan City Councilor Wang Ting-yu;
-- The arrest and detention on October 31st of former National Security Council (NSC) secretary-general and Deputy Prime Minister Chiou I-jen;
-- The questioning of former Foreign Minister Dr. Mark Chen on November 3rd and insinuations in the press that he might be charged and arrested.
-- The arrest and detention on November 4th of DPP Yunlin County Magistrate Ms. Su Chih-fen.
---------
延伸閱讀:
美友人連署 關切台灣司法公平 (自由時報)
加拿大人權協會將馬英九政府列入觀察名單(英文)
連署(英文): http://www.thepetitionsite.com/10/--if-gte-mso-9xml-wworddocument-wviewnormalwview-wzoom0wzoom-wpunctuationkerning
幾個連署(revised on 11/11)
1) 台灣人權促進會: 抗議馬政府向中國人權低標看齊
台灣人權促進會: http://www.tahr.org.tw/index.php/article/2008/11/04/619/
請各位加入個人連署: http://spreadsheets.google.com/viewform?key=pQ_fAjbY0ryb_9wXF5oKxXg
以抗議馬政府粗糙且傷害民眾自由與人權之作為,將憤怒表達出來!
2) 1106「野草莓學運」--修改「集會遊行法」連署活動
個人連署區: http://campaign.tw-npo.org/200811803195100/person_connect.php?serial=200811803195100
3) 「抗議國家暴力，聲援靜坐學生」─台灣學界連署聲明
http://spreadsheets.google.com/viewform?key=pQ_fAjbY0ryYEXUW4JQZGBg
4) 音樂界聲明與連署
http://crimson.ee.ncku.edu.tw/wordpress/?p=314
5) 海外留學生/學者連署
http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=pd6mNyDypxOddgQjI0cjHdg&hl=en
台灣人權促進會: http://www.tahr.org.tw/index.php/article/2008/11/04/619/
請各位加入個人連署: http://spreadsheets.google.com/viewform?key=pQ_fAjbY0ryb_9wXF5oKxXg
以抗議馬政府粗糙且傷害民眾自由與人權之作為,將憤怒表達出來!
2) 1106「野草莓學運」--修改「集會遊行法」連署活動
個人連署區: http://campaign.tw-npo.org/200811803195100/person_connect.php?serial=200811803195100
3) 「抗議國家暴力，聲援靜坐學生」─台灣學界連署聲明
http://spreadsheets.google.com/viewform?key=pQ_fAjbY0ryYEXUW4JQZGBg
4) 音樂界聲明與連署
http://crimson.ee.ncku.edu.tw/wordpress/?p=314
5) 海外留學生/學者連署
http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=pd6mNyDypxOddgQjI0cjHdg&hl=en
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)