原文取自外獨會之討論串
雲林慘輸, 藍營驚問:扁案為何無效了?
發言人:馬慘, on Sep 27/2009 00:36:35 (IP code: X.X.106.15)
雲林立委選前二天, 馬英九藍營才故意又把扁案大搞特搞了一下,
再來個押放扁的戲碼大串演,
還料定扁要崩潰, 再趁機用媒體羞辱扁"軟腳, 癱軟"
以為這扁戲一定又可凝聚藍支的仇恨心, 激出選票,
沒想到一點效用都沒有, 雲林補選慘敗,
二個藍營加起來票還比一個綠營少,
藍支爛嘴不禁錯愕問: 扁案為何對人民一點影響都沒有了?
Record ID: 1253982995 From: 台灣 回信發言人:馬慘, on Sep 27/2009 00:38:17 (IP code: X.X.106.15)
馬英九真的以為總統那麼好當, 靠一個扁案就想吃八年?
Record ID: 1253982995R001 From: 台灣 回信發言人:笑藍蛆, on Sep 27/2009 00:38:39 (IP code: X.X.171.207)
扁關的越久 國民黨輸的越慘
Record ID: 1253982995R002 From: 台灣 回信發言人:呵呵, on Sep 27/2009 00:40:56 (IP code: X.X.193.122)
這次慘輸是因為馬英九沒有去雲林Long Stay
Record ID: 1253982995R003 From: 台灣 回信發言人:馬慘, on Sep 27/2009 00:42:23 (IP code: X.X.106.15)
藍支爛嘴今晚可能偷偷躲在棉被裡發抖了,
扁案再練也沒有用的話, 那以後他們要靠什麼吃飯???
靠駡在野黨嗎? 有什麼好駡的? 1/4席次的在野黨有什麼好駡的?
靠駡執政黨過活嗎? 怎可能? 就拿執政黨的好處混飯吃的,
怎能駡自己的老板?
難怪今晚藍支爛嘴一個個如喪考妣, 臉色如土!!!
Record ID: 1253982995R004 From: 台灣 回信發言人:馬慘, on Sep 27/2009 00:48:11 (IP code: X.X.106.15)
藍支爛嘴和馬英九一樣白痴,
就算扁真的十惡不赦, 也都被你馬英九下在大牢裡, 說不放就不放了,
你再駡扁又能怎樣? 恨死扁的人要你馬英九殺了扁, 你做不到,
要你把他關到死, 你馬英九都做到了, 那還要扁怎樣?
不必了, 就讓扁在牢裡被虐待到死就是了, 再恨扁的人, 心思也不過如此吧?
所以, 馬英九和藍支爛嘴以為可以靠扁吃穿不盡, 真的是想得美哦!
Record ID: 1253982995R005 From: 台灣 回信發言人:馬慘, on Sep 27/2009 00:50:25 (IP code: X.X.106.15)
看到楊憲宏者流知道大勢已去, 駡扁也混不下去了,
要再流浪回綠營也被拒收了, 那一臉脹屎的樣子, 真是爽啊!
Record ID: 1253982995R006 From: 台灣 回信發言人:GGYY, on Sep 27/2009 00:51:54 (IP code: X.X.165.222)
喔呵
狗鳴洞有洨就繼續再玩爛扁把爛扁關到死嘛
放爛扁出來到處該該叫
狗鳴洞搞不好還有好處撈
^+++^
Record ID: 1253982995R007 From: 台灣 回信發言人:路人丙, on Sep 27/2009 00:59:13 (IP code: X.X.111.189)
因為對外向支那脫衣陪酒，自斷產業根基，對內施政無能虛偽顢頇，百姓看破手腳，
人呆看面就知，找個享慣福的支那人來當台灣總統自始就是個天大錯誤，台灣人應該要自覺
Record ID: 1253982995R008 From: 台灣 回信發言人:馬慘, on Sep 27/2009 00:59:26 (IP code: X.X.106.15)
馬英九和藍支爛嘴怎麼那麼腦殘啊,
把扁關在牢裡都關到半條命了,
還每晚拼命駡扁貪污, 去美國告官要求美國軍事接管, 為害台灣------
拜託, 你們在起肖, 台灣人可沒有肖,
在牢裡的扁還怎麼污? 怎麼告官到美國也發揮不了什麼作用, 誰不知呢?
在牢裡的扁還怎麼害台, 台灣人實在看不出來可能性,
反而怕死了馬英九搞的失業率大增, 租稅大增, ECFA把台灣賣給中國---
害死台灣人沒飯吃,
台灣人可不笨, 現在看得出來, 牢裡的扁危害不了台灣,
掌大權的馬英九郤可能讓台灣人下十八層地獄,
所以, 現在還每天練扁已經沒有用了, 藍支真的不知道嗎?
Record ID: 1253982995R009 From: 台灣 回信發言人:啵比啵比啵比!!, on Sep 27/2009 00:59:27 (IP code: X.X.197.243)
嘿點鍋鍋平安
泥還媚有企水餃!?
Record ID: 1253982995R010 From: 台灣 回信發言人:馬慘, on Sep 27/2009 01:02:12 (IP code: X.X.106.15)
還有提醒軍公教, 照馬英九這樣舉債掏空台灣下去,
你們的終身俸真的會提早讓馬英九敗光光
Record ID: 1253982995R011 From: 台灣 回信發言人:呵, on Sep 27/2009 01:16:06 (IP code: X.X.12.212)
扁仔貪瀆和雲林補選並不相干
這次民進黨勝選和蔡英文凝聚黨內力量有很大的關係
Record ID: 1253982995R012 From: 美國 回信發言人:馬慘, on Sep 27/2009 01:21:37 (IP code: X.X.106.15)
這次雲林綠營大勝,
馬英九的功勞最大!
Record ID: 1253982995R013 From: 台灣 回信發言人:路人丙, on Sep 27/2009 01:30:07 (IP code: X.X.111.189)
馬應該把扁放出來站台，但是牠一定不敢，呵呵.....
Record ID: 1253982995R014 From: 台灣 回信發言人:蠟筆老新, on Sep 27/2009 01:36:51 (IP code: X.X.228.147)
爽啊~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Record ID: 1253982995R015 From: 內太空 回信發言人:恐怖, on Sep 27/2009 01:37:28 (IP code: X.X.110.221)
台灣人看阿扁一家人被馬英九如此虐待，終於看清楚馬英九的狡猾陰狠的本性，擔心自己的子孫會不會也落入馬英九血腥雙手中。
Record ID: 1253982995R016 From: 台灣 回信發言人:呵, on Sep 27/2009 01:46:02 (IP code: X.X.12.212)
扁仔繼續蹲在牢裡
有助民進黨勝選
要球放扁仔出獄的
就是存心想害民進黨
Record ID: 1253982995R017 From: 美國 回信發言人:18%, on Sep 27/2009 02:04:16 (IP code: X.X.113.143)
我希望馬狗千千萬萬別把阿扁放出來
讓2100繼續練.練到765萬票都煩了
練到其中200萬票都練醒了
練到2012最少台灣人非贏200萬票回來
練到台灣年輕一輩都清楚到原來228事件都是真的.
原來美麗島事件也是真的
繼續告殷琪吧.把陳敏薰關個2年.查吳念真的公司稅判他10年.....
...
馬狗~請繼續
Record ID: 1253982995R018 From: 台灣 回信發言人:蠟筆老新, on Sep 27/2009 02:09:33 (IP code: X.X.228.147)
查吳念真的公司稅判他10年.....
--------------------------
華特 ? 蝦咪關連到吳念真了 ?
Labels for this post:打扁,馬無能,獨裁統治,劉建國,雲林,司法迫害
Showing posts with label 獨裁統治. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 獨裁統治. Show all posts
Sunday, September 27, 2009
Sunday, September 20, 2009
經濟學人雜誌痛批馬狗司法迫害
上面是媒抗的部分中文翻釋,下面是英文版原文
http://www.truenews.cc/ftalk/portal.php?news=5&sid=4265359a7c7510dc9e...
The trials of Ah-Bian
阿扁的司法審判
經濟學人，The Economist print edition
Sep 17th 2009
說明：911後陳水扁案的文章俯拾即是，《經濟學人》也接連發了2篇，這篇仍維持抨擊司法體系與國民黨的基調
。修伯特去除陳水扁政治生涯與對中國的影響部分，僅節錄「司法體系瑕疵」之部分，請見諒。陳水扁案至今滿一星期
，我們要堅決主張司法人權，更應該關切各項重大發展：賭博、採礦、無力的經濟、中國的政經兩手策略、日本的戰略轉
變等，放寬眼界，我們的母親之島會更好。
審判台灣前總統是創舉；但司法瑕疵令人蒙羞。
譯註：修伯特不能同意這句話更多！
操作(handling)審判也引起關切。從好處想，部分司法制度仍陷入昔日的陳苛；從壞處想，司法制度再次受到國民黨的命令。
主要的憂慮是，審判前和審判時拘留陳水扁，包括一個月的單人囚室。沒有人可合理解釋，為什麼釋放陳水扁的法官會被更換，那時國民黨政治人物疾聲抗議。新
任法官蔡守訓馬上再次拘留陳水扁。蔡守訓之前正好審判過馬英九任內濫用特別費的案件，那時宣判馬英九無罪，僅判助手（余文）1年刑期。
陳水扁的助理分別被判20年（馬永成）與16年（林德訓），他們宣稱這是國民黨與馬英九合奏的政治仇殺。這難以維繫哈佛律師馬英九的清白形象，也引出台
灣距離法治民主有多遠的問題。責難司法體系審判瑕疵更有理的說法是，從獨裁統治下貪贓枉法與順從（國民黨），不完美地跳躍到司法獨立與正當程序。台灣法
官─檢察官一體在6年前才被打破，取代的是公正的法官要聽完控訴與辯護雙方論點的體系。蔡守訓審判期間對陳水扁公開的敵意，讓人想到某些舊的態度難以被
撼動。
檢察官巨大的權力，包括審問個人而不讓他們知道什麼被記錄了，仍是民主的污點。檢察官在年度晚會演出陳水扁抗議戴上手銬的諷刺劇，也讓人蒙羞；政府則裝
聾作啞。因陳水扁辯護律師鄭文龍質疑審判程序的公平性，法務部長遂威脅要取消其律師資格。馬英九老師、現任紐約大學教授孔傑榮(Jerome
Cohen)說，這些動作打了中國人權律師一巴掌。
你對未來台灣法律的結論，決定於你認為審判陳水扁有沒有政治動機。若沒有，在其總統任內調查與卸任後的審判，無疑是個里程碑。而且，司法體系正回應審判
的缺點。舉例而言，由於陳水扁的挑戰，檢察官要參加和紀錄被告與辯護人之間會面的堅決主張，已經被宣告違反憲法。
譯註：就個人觀點來說，欣見於法律之前人人平等的里程碑，這或許是陳水扁案的正面成果。
http://www.economist.com/world/asia/displaystory.cfm?story_id=14456921
Sep 17th 2009
From The Economist print edition
Bringing Taiwan’s former president to trial is ground-breaking. A
shame about the judicial flaws
Illustration by M. MorgensternA DRAMA that has transfixed Taiwan came
to a head on September 11th when Chen Shui-bian, president from 2000
to 2008, was sentenced to life in jail for embezzlement, money-
laundering and bribe-taking. A life sentence was also given to his
crippled wife. This is not the end of the saga, for a long appeals
process stretches ahead. Still, bringing a former leader to book is
unprecedented for Taiwan. It is, indeed, an inspiring first in Chinese
history for a toppled ruler to be punished by the law rather than the
mob. So more’s the pity that the achievement is marred by flaws in the
legal system that Mr Chen’s trial has highlighted.
A quick reminder of the plot to date. During the “White Terror” of the
Kuomintang (KMT) dictatorship, Wu Shu-chen, a beauty from a well-to-do
family, falls for the idealism of a poor tenant-farmer’s son,
nicknamed Ah-Bian, who has put his precocious talents as a lawyer into
the fight for justice, human rights and democracy. She pays a physical
price, when one day at a rally she is hit by a farm truck that runs
back and forth three times over her legs. KMT hitmen may have been
responsible. She is confined for life to a wheelchair.
Ah-Bian redoubles his battle against dictatorship and corruption.
Opposition efforts begin to bear fruit, and democracy comes to Taiwan.
In 2000 Ah-Bian himself wins the presidency as head of the Democratic
Progressive Party (DPP), overturning the KMT’s half-century of power.
He furthers Taiwan’ s democratisation, always controversially, by
restructuring governing institutions and shaping a Taiwanese identity
that stands out from mainland China’s. But this lifetime fighter
against corruption proves to be very corrupt by any standards—except
possibly the past KMT’s.
It has taken three years since the first real whiff of scandal for Mr
Chen’s followers to face up to the scale on which their man has let
them down. The DPP has felt the trauma in emotional and electoral
terms. As for Mr Chen’s psychology, it is a story worthy of great
tragedy. Friends say that high office made a humble man arrogant. They
also emphasise his family’s suffering. In franker moments Mr Chen
confessed to abiding guilt over Miss Wu’s disability. His wife seems
to have played on this: didn’t she deserve a few jewels the size of
boulders? At heart, this has been Mr Chen’s justification in his few
expressions of public remorse, though former supporters think he has
not apologised enough.
Yet, for all the revulsion with Mr Chen, the handling of his trial has
also raised concerns. At best, many say, the judiciary has one foot
stuck in the bad old days. At worst, it takes its orders from the KMT,
now back in power.
The main worry has to do with Mr Chen’s detention before and during
the trial, including a month in solitary confinement. No one has
properly explained why, after the presiding judge freed Mr Chen from
pre-trial detention (to loud protests by KMT politicians), the judge
was replaced. The new judge, Tsai Shou-hsun, promptly detained Mr Chen
again. Mr Tsai happens to have presided over an earlier trial of Ma
Ying-jeou of the KMT, now Mr Chen’s successor as president, who was
accused of abusing political funds when he was mayor of Taipei in ways
that recall Mr Chen’s case. But Mr Tsai acquitted Mr Ma, and gave an
aide involved in the abuse a year in jail.
Mr Chen’s supporters, pointing to his life sentence, and to the 20-
and 16-year sentences meted out respectively to two of his aides,
claim a political vendetta by the KMT, orchestrated by Mr Ma. That
would hardly be in keeping with the clean-guy image of Mr Ma, a
Harvard-trained lawyer. It would also throw into question how far
Taiwan has really come as a law-based democracy. But it is more
plausible to blame the trial’s flaws on a legal system that has only
imperfectly made the leap from being venal and biddable under
dictatorship towards judicial independence and due process. Six years
ago Taiwan’s judge-prosecutors were replaced by a system in which
impartial judges are meant to hear out the case for the prosecution
and the defence. Mr Tsai’s open hostility to Mr Chen during the trial
suggests some old-school attitudes are hard to shake off.
What is more, prosecutors’ immense powers, including the practice of
interrogating an individual without letting him know what he is said
to have done, remain a blot on democracy. Shameful too was the skit
performed at the prosecutors’ annual dinner in which mockery was made
of Mr Chen famously protesting at the humiliation of having to wear
handcuffs. No rebuke came from the government. Now the justice
ministry threatens to disbar Mr Chen’s lawyer, Cheng Wen-lung, for
questioning the fairness of the judicial process. That smacks, says
Jerome Cohen, Mr Ma’s former law professor, now at New York
University, of the persecution of human-rights lawyers in China.
Drawing the right conclusions
What conclusions you draw about the future rule of law in Taiwan
depend on whether you believe Mr Chen’ s trial was politically
motivated or not. If not—and the investigation of Mr Chen, after all,
began when he was still president—then the trial of a former president
is surely a landmark. What is more, the legal system is responding to
the trial’s shortcomings. For instance, thanks to a challenge by Mr
Chen, the prosecutors’ insistence that they attend and record meetings
between defendants and their counsel has now been ruled
unconstitutional.
More telling, the KMT is looking anew at the whole business of murky
political funds which the reforming Mr Chen should have addressed as a
cancer on democracy, but instead dipped into. And most telling of all
is China’s official reaction to the downfall of an enemy loathed for
his embrace of Taiwanese independence. The reaction has been very
nearly mute. After all, to cheer Taiwan’s pursuit of a corrupt leader
might encourage China’s own citizens to draw all the wrong inferences
about what should happen to their own rulers.
Labels for this post:
司法迫害,台灣馬英九,阿扁,國民黨,獨裁統治
http://www.truenews.cc/ftalk/portal.php?news=5&sid=4265359a7c7510dc9e...
The trials of Ah-Bian
阿扁的司法審判
經濟學人，The Economist print edition
Sep 17th 2009
說明：911後陳水扁案的文章俯拾即是，《經濟學人》也接連發了2篇，這篇仍維持抨擊司法體系與國民黨的基調
。修伯特去除陳水扁政治生涯與對中國的影響部分，僅節錄「司法體系瑕疵」之部分，請見諒。陳水扁案至今滿一星期
，我們要堅決主張司法人權，更應該關切各項重大發展：賭博、採礦、無力的經濟、中國的政經兩手策略、日本的戰略轉
變等，放寬眼界，我們的母親之島會更好。
審判台灣前總統是創舉；但司法瑕疵令人蒙羞。
譯註：修伯特不能同意這句話更多！
操作(handling)審判也引起關切。從好處想，部分司法制度仍陷入昔日的陳苛；從壞處想，司法制度再次受到國民黨的命令。
主要的憂慮是，審判前和審判時拘留陳水扁，包括一個月的單人囚室。沒有人可合理解釋，為什麼釋放陳水扁的法官會被更換，那時國民黨政治人物疾聲抗議。新
任法官蔡守訓馬上再次拘留陳水扁。蔡守訓之前正好審判過馬英九任內濫用特別費的案件，那時宣判馬英九無罪，僅判助手（余文）1年刑期。
陳水扁的助理分別被判20年（馬永成）與16年（林德訓），他們宣稱這是國民黨與馬英九合奏的政治仇殺。這難以維繫哈佛律師馬英九的清白形象，也引出台
灣距離法治民主有多遠的問題。責難司法體系審判瑕疵更有理的說法是，從獨裁統治下貪贓枉法與順從（國民黨），不完美地跳躍到司法獨立與正當程序。台灣法
官─檢察官一體在6年前才被打破，取代的是公正的法官要聽完控訴與辯護雙方論點的體系。蔡守訓審判期間對陳水扁公開的敵意，讓人想到某些舊的態度難以被
撼動。
檢察官巨大的權力，包括審問個人而不讓他們知道什麼被記錄了，仍是民主的污點。檢察官在年度晚會演出陳水扁抗議戴上手銬的諷刺劇，也讓人蒙羞；政府則裝
聾作啞。因陳水扁辯護律師鄭文龍質疑審判程序的公平性，法務部長遂威脅要取消其律師資格。馬英九老師、現任紐約大學教授孔傑榮(Jerome
Cohen)說，這些動作打了中國人權律師一巴掌。
你對未來台灣法律的結論，決定於你認為審判陳水扁有沒有政治動機。若沒有，在其總統任內調查與卸任後的審判，無疑是個里程碑。而且，司法體系正回應審判
的缺點。舉例而言，由於陳水扁的挑戰，檢察官要參加和紀錄被告與辯護人之間會面的堅決主張，已經被宣告違反憲法。
譯註：就個人觀點來說，欣見於法律之前人人平等的里程碑，這或許是陳水扁案的正面成果。
http://www.economist.com/world/asia/displaystory.cfm?story_id=14456921
Sep 17th 2009
From The Economist print edition
Bringing Taiwan’s former president to trial is ground-breaking. A
shame about the judicial flaws
Illustration by M. MorgensternA DRAMA that has transfixed Taiwan came
to a head on September 11th when Chen Shui-bian, president from 2000
to 2008, was sentenced to life in jail for embezzlement, money-
laundering and bribe-taking. A life sentence was also given to his
crippled wife. This is not the end of the saga, for a long appeals
process stretches ahead. Still, bringing a former leader to book is
unprecedented for Taiwan. It is, indeed, an inspiring first in Chinese
history for a toppled ruler to be punished by the law rather than the
mob. So more’s the pity that the achievement is marred by flaws in the
legal system that Mr Chen’s trial has highlighted.
A quick reminder of the plot to date. During the “White Terror” of the
Kuomintang (KMT) dictatorship, Wu Shu-chen, a beauty from a well-to-do
family, falls for the idealism of a poor tenant-farmer’s son,
nicknamed Ah-Bian, who has put his precocious talents as a lawyer into
the fight for justice, human rights and democracy. She pays a physical
price, when one day at a rally she is hit by a farm truck that runs
back and forth three times over her legs. KMT hitmen may have been
responsible. She is confined for life to a wheelchair.
Ah-Bian redoubles his battle against dictatorship and corruption.
Opposition efforts begin to bear fruit, and democracy comes to Taiwan.
In 2000 Ah-Bian himself wins the presidency as head of the Democratic
Progressive Party (DPP), overturning the KMT’s half-century of power.
He furthers Taiwan’ s democratisation, always controversially, by
restructuring governing institutions and shaping a Taiwanese identity
that stands out from mainland China’s. But this lifetime fighter
against corruption proves to be very corrupt by any standards—except
possibly the past KMT’s.
It has taken three years since the first real whiff of scandal for Mr
Chen’s followers to face up to the scale on which their man has let
them down. The DPP has felt the trauma in emotional and electoral
terms. As for Mr Chen’s psychology, it is a story worthy of great
tragedy. Friends say that high office made a humble man arrogant. They
also emphasise his family’s suffering. In franker moments Mr Chen
confessed to abiding guilt over Miss Wu’s disability. His wife seems
to have played on this: didn’t she deserve a few jewels the size of
boulders? At heart, this has been Mr Chen’s justification in his few
expressions of public remorse, though former supporters think he has
not apologised enough.
Yet, for all the revulsion with Mr Chen, the handling of his trial has
also raised concerns. At best, many say, the judiciary has one foot
stuck in the bad old days. At worst, it takes its orders from the KMT,
now back in power.
The main worry has to do with Mr Chen’s detention before and during
the trial, including a month in solitary confinement. No one has
properly explained why, after the presiding judge freed Mr Chen from
pre-trial detention (to loud protests by KMT politicians), the judge
was replaced. The new judge, Tsai Shou-hsun, promptly detained Mr Chen
again. Mr Tsai happens to have presided over an earlier trial of Ma
Ying-jeou of the KMT, now Mr Chen’s successor as president, who was
accused of abusing political funds when he was mayor of Taipei in ways
that recall Mr Chen’s case. But Mr Tsai acquitted Mr Ma, and gave an
aide involved in the abuse a year in jail.
Mr Chen’s supporters, pointing to his life sentence, and to the 20-
and 16-year sentences meted out respectively to two of his aides,
claim a political vendetta by the KMT, orchestrated by Mr Ma. That
would hardly be in keeping with the clean-guy image of Mr Ma, a
Harvard-trained lawyer. It would also throw into question how far
Taiwan has really come as a law-based democracy. But it is more
plausible to blame the trial’s flaws on a legal system that has only
imperfectly made the leap from being venal and biddable under
dictatorship towards judicial independence and due process. Six years
ago Taiwan’s judge-prosecutors were replaced by a system in which
impartial judges are meant to hear out the case for the prosecution
and the defence. Mr Tsai’s open hostility to Mr Chen during the trial
suggests some old-school attitudes are hard to shake off.
What is more, prosecutors’ immense powers, including the practice of
interrogating an individual without letting him know what he is said
to have done, remain a blot on democracy. Shameful too was the skit
performed at the prosecutors’ annual dinner in which mockery was made
of Mr Chen famously protesting at the humiliation of having to wear
handcuffs. No rebuke came from the government. Now the justice
ministry threatens to disbar Mr Chen’s lawyer, Cheng Wen-lung, for
questioning the fairness of the judicial process. That smacks, says
Jerome Cohen, Mr Ma’s former law professor, now at New York
University, of the persecution of human-rights lawyers in China.
Drawing the right conclusions
What conclusions you draw about the future rule of law in Taiwan
depend on whether you believe Mr Chen’ s trial was politically
motivated or not. If not—and the investigation of Mr Chen, after all,
began when he was still president—then the trial of a former president
is surely a landmark. What is more, the legal system is responding to
the trial’s shortcomings. For instance, thanks to a challenge by Mr
Chen, the prosecutors’ insistence that they attend and record meetings
between defendants and their counsel has now been ruled
unconstitutional.
More telling, the KMT is looking anew at the whole business of murky
political funds which the reforming Mr Chen should have addressed as a
cancer on democracy, but instead dipped into. And most telling of all
is China’s official reaction to the downfall of an enemy loathed for
his embrace of Taiwanese independence. The reaction has been very
nearly mute. After all, to cheer Taiwan’s pursuit of a corrupt leader
might encourage China’s own citizens to draw all the wrong inferences
about what should happen to their own rulers.
Labels for this post:
司法迫害,台灣馬英九,阿扁,國民黨,獨裁統治
Friday, September 11, 2009
好文收錄-台灣司法新偶像──納粹法官佛萊斯勒
台灣司法新偶像──納粹法官佛萊斯勒
台灣司法新偶像──納粹法官佛萊斯勒文章來源: http://www.southnews.com.tw/polit/polit_00/13/02277.htm／段正明
扁案審理的違法和破壞制度，根本上已經是台灣司法史上最敗壞的一頁了。
筆者認為一個公平的對待陳水扁貪污案的程序，會是司法能否取得人民信賴的一個非常重要的試金石；
因為在可能的將來，馬英九、劉兆玄及中國國民黨所有的官員，也會面臨相同的審判。
司法應該要做到不分藍綠的公平公正，這不是高道德標準的問題，而是法律問題；就如同歐巴馬要取消
關達那摩的監禁和中情局其他的黑牢一樣，只有可以信賴的司法才會有真正的民主，這正是民主與法治
不可分的原因。
納粹法官佛萊斯勒何許人也？或許在台灣較少人知道，但如果看過「帝國大審判」這部描述「慕尼黑
白玫瑰學生運動」為背景的電影者，會看到一個法官在庭上大聲咆哮，不准當事人發言，甚至在被白玫瑰
反希特勒學生辯倒時，馬上叫著「不准發言，我知道了！」、「你給我坐下」之類的話，這個人就是
納粹時代最得希特勒信任的大法官佛萊斯勒。
佛萊斯勒這個人最厲害的地方，是他常常告訴大家，「自己是正港的左派民主人士，而且也曾經是
共產黨員，但是，在希特勒的國家社會主義之下，他認為共產主義變得沒有說服力，因為真正的烏托邦是
在希特勒領導之下才能完成的，沒有希特勒就沒有德意志，真正的人類幸福和和平的追求者是希特勒領導下
的德意志帝國。」
佛萊斯勒更厲害的地方，是出賣了有猶太血統的法官同事，並且強調自己是「正港的德國人，為了德意志
民族的未來，他必須做到公平正義，他必須為了法律而犧牲自己的私人感情。」
希特勒信任佛萊斯勒到什麼程度呢？希特勒自己說，「只要是佛萊斯勒判決的，都是絕對正確的，不單單
是我個人意志的貫徹，也是社會公平正義的實現，是有利於全民族的」。
希特勒這麼放心正港的共產黨員和民主人士佛萊斯勒可見一斑，甚至在史陶芬堡刺殺希特勒的「女武神行動」
之後，肅清帝國鐵衛裡的高階叛亂軍官也是佛萊斯勒的司法任務。
佛萊斯勒的法庭秩序維持，就是對於被告所採行的辯護詞完全不理，在被告反駁時，他會大叫，「你這個
背叛國家的混蛋，給我閉嘴坐下」、「夠了，我不想再聽你污衊元首的發言」、「你確定你說的符合事實嗎？」、
「我知道了！我已經說過我知道了！」而且和檢察官、納粹指定的律師三方一起糾問被告，最後他最愛說的
就是：「以德意志人民之名，判處你死刑。」
後來盟軍反攻時，佛萊斯勒被視為頭等戰犯，與希特勒、納粹宣傳部的葛培爾、黨衛軍的頭頭希姆萊、
帝國空軍元帥戈林，是屬於同一個級數的。但是，佛萊斯勒運氣很好，後來沒有被盟軍抓到，他是在一場
空襲中，被司法大廈倒下的樑柱壓死的。
看看蔡守訓在報紙上強調自己正港台灣人的身分，以及他在法庭上的言行，再對比司法節時，慶啟人編劇，
張安箴及另外毫無人權、刑訴基本素養的檢察官的搭配演出，心中實在感慨萬千。
台灣甚麼時候也實行納粹德國司法制度了，這就是所謂司法改革的成果嗎？陳水扁有罪，難道不該有公平的
司法審判！而必須用這種嘲弄的方式來對付他嗎？這難道不是佛萊斯勒式的糾問嗎？何時佛萊斯勒變成台灣
司法界的偶像了！
白玫瑰起義的學生漢斯‧蕭爾說的一句話，或許可以給蔡守訓和那些心中沒有法律制度，以取笑當事人為樂的
檢察官和法官作為警惕：
「今天你判處我們死刑，明天就輪到你們自己。」（段正明／律師，現留學德國）
Labels for this post: |
Friday, July 31, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
