>Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 18:52:52 -0700 (PDT)
>From: i_love_taiwan@googlegroups.com (on behalf of Shin Liu <shinliu@yahoo.com>)
>Subject: [I Love Taiwan] Ultimately, Taiwan Status problem is a political problem
>To: Raymond Lee <raylee56@hotmail.com>,natpa_
>
> Link: File-List
> Link: themeData
> Link: colorSchemeMapping
>
> Dear Raymond and All:
>
>
>
> Your commentary on 曹長青’s article
> ”台灣前途不是法律問題 “ concluded that
> “台灣前途不只是政治問題，也是法律問題 “ and the
> correct legal approach is a plebiscite on the status of Taiwan by the
> people of Taiwan.
>
>
>
> I’ll comment on this legal approach further to determine the status
> of Taiwan, ie, a plebiscite exercised by the people of Taiwan. It is a
> necessary step to declare the establishment of Taiwan nation. It fully
> reflects the will of the people of Taiwan, and fully accepted by the
> international human right standard. Devoid of the others external
> factors, this is the best way to show the world the heart and mind of
> the people of Taiwan.
>
>
>
> To exercise this plebiscite itself is a political act and requires a
> political solution. For example, who should sponsor this vote, who is
> eligible to vote, and under what voting rules (not KMT’s bird’s
> cage referendum laws), and most important of all how to prevent China
> intervention.
>
>
>
> LAW is a subset of POLITICS. Laws are created by the people to
> reflect a standard that every one needs to follow. A law, requires
> sanction by the highest law , that is the constitution, in a country,
> or in the international arena, are recognized by the participating
> states in a treaty. Beyond that, law requires the power and the mean
> of enforcement.
>
>
>
> The formation of a law itself is a political process. It can be
> formed, either dictated by a dictator or by a democratic congress’s
> majority votes. Sometimes we wrongly equate the law as the justice.
> It is a justice only when the law is a just law and being applied and
> enforced fairly. And another deeper question is who’s justice
> anyway?
>
>
>
> To explain why the law is a subset of the politics, following examples
> will demonstrate:
>
>
>
> Case 1 CBS’s life imprisonment sentence:
>
>
>
> In Taiwan, KMT using the law for political purpose. They pick and
> choose the law as the tool for political persecution. They choose who
> to prosecute and who not to and even being prosecuted, under KMT’s
> system the judge will apply different standards for the verdict
> depending on the prosecuted political color. CSB was persecuted under
> KMT’s double standards of the application of the law, and devoid of
> human right consideration. We can rightly claim CSB is a political
> prisoner under KMT’s persecution. My argument is that if CSB’s
> acts require a life imprisonment, then what are the punishment for
> those in KMT’s regime?
>
>
>
> Case 2 China’s anti-cession law
>
>
>
> To prevent Taiwan declares independent, China passed an anti-cession
> law. This law is a domestic law, which to justify its future arm
> invasion of Taiwan. However, the legal status of Taiwan is in a
> limbo. The starting point of this law is that Taiwan is a part of
> China. But is it? What is the people of Taiwan believe. Are they a
> part of China or not. If they believe they are not a part of China,
> and does not agree with this forced marriage, are there any legal
> means for them to prevent this forced marriage? What prevents
> China’s invasion is the existence of the international deterrents.
> That China may confront with the US.
>
>
>
> Legally, both sides claim Taiwan are in a very different historical
> paths. However, political solution is the only way to resolve this
> impasse as 曹長青 suggested.
>
> That is people of Taiwan are well educated and shows her heart and
> mind through, as said by Raymond Lee,
> 行使自決權。而行使自決權也是一種法律上行動.
>
> Shin
>
發表文章
沒有留言:
張貼留言