Posts from the ‘陳水扁’ Category

李敏勇: 關扁政治學

馬英九在二○○八年,以打扁、鬥臭民進黨,取得總統席位。雖然,某種意義上,反映了政黨輪替執政的原理在台灣起了作用。但這只是人民的單純性流露,負面性之大是想像不到的。

馬力要在馬兒奔跑時才會顯露出來。在二○○八年之前,馬英九只是被包裝在玻璃花紙裡寵物般的存在。把貪腐倒在民進黨和阿扁身上,讓台灣人民忽視了改變中國國民黨執政的政治新氣象:自由化、本土化及延伸的發展價值,這延續自李登輝時代的建樹。中國國民黨和馬英九對李登輝也有怨氣,一股勁都朝阿扁身上丟擲。

二○○八年,因馬英九?中國國民黨復辟了,對於這樣的黨而言,以後不見得還有機會了。怎麼處置阿扁?哪管他是兩任總統—以貪腐之名,藉法律之力,把他關進牢裡。

其實,中國國民黨是心虛的。在它的黨國體制裡,比起阿扁和民進黨不堪聞問多了。從專制獨裁走向全面公職選舉,金錢政治的問題性,誰不知道?但這就是民進黨和其他非中國國民黨政治人物的陷阱。阿扁也在陷阱裡,甚至以清廉標榜的馬英九,或許二○○八年可以依賴空口宣傳。二○一二年,花了多少錢選總統?除了不義黨產挹注,錢又從哪來?他不知道嗎?難道馬下台後,也要在牢裡過餘生?

心虛的中國國民黨,心虛心橫的馬英九,把阿扁關在牢裡,其實是懲罰非中國國民黨人執「中華民國」之政的大逆。這個國家是誰的?你膽敢執政?李登輝以中國國民黨、台灣人都不見容於殖民統治心態。你阿扁、台灣人,不找機會懲罰你,才怪!

關阿扁,得利的馬英九樂在其中,但中國國民黨或將因馬的執政無能,導致人民的新覺醒,被牽拖受累。某些中國國民黨政治人物也附和讓阿扁保外就醫之論,不無此想。

阿扁執政時,沒有確實進行對中國國民黨長期執政的清算,萬惡的中國國民黨黨產問題也未解決,徒然讓這個體制在最後的機會反噬。但中國國民黨馬英九羞辱阿扁,難道就沒有羞辱到自己?沒有羞辱到挾持的「中華民國」嗎?

(作者李敏勇,詩人)

http://www.libertytimes.com.tw/2012/new/sep/15/today-f2.htm

廣告

陳水扁 ( 阿扁札記): 又有多少人瞭解「扁案」?

陳水扁 ( 阿扁札記): 又有多少人瞭解「扁案」?

How many people really know enough about “The Abian Cases”?

又有多少人瞭解「扁案」

◎ Abian-ah Diary ( 阿扁札記)

1. 敗選推給扁案毫無道理

除了獨裁國家,只要有民主選舉,絕對沒有萬年執政黨。選舉有輸贏,原因也不會單一。美國總統大選,每四年、八年或十二年政黨輪替一次,都是兵家常事。二00八年共和黨輸掉政權,麥肯不會把敗選責任推給小布希;同樣地,二000年民主黨敗給共和黨,高爾也不會將責任怪罪柯林頓。唯獨台灣,才有人會把二00八年、二0一二年本土政權敗選責任全推給「扁案」,甚至要求民進黨要和「扁案」確實切割乾淨,不該再由扁家及扁迷,一味地企圖以「扁案」緊緊綁住民進黨。

「扁案」開庭期間,獲准旁聽的民眾不到二十人,媒體的相關報導少之又少,忠實而客觀的報導更絕無僅有。我的答辯、律師的辯護,試問又有幾個人聽到、看到?大家談「扁案」,又有多少人瞭解「扁案」?「扁案」可以判無期,也可以判無罪;「扁案」可以判無罪,也可以改判十幾年的重刑,落差之大,令人髮指!

During the trials of the “Abian Cases”, only less than 20 people were allowed to attend the court hearing. The coverage by the news media was very limited. Impartial and accurate reports almost did no exist. How many people actual got to listen to the defense by myself and the rebuttal and cross-examination by my lawyers? For those who comment on “the Abian case” loosely, how many of them really know enough about “the Abian cases”? (note: “the Abian cases” is a term for all court cases against President Chen Shui Bian.) For one “Abian Case”, some judges sentenced to life in prison, but some acquitted me; for another “Abian Case”, some judges acquitted me, while others sentenced me to over 10 years in jail. With the verdicts this disbelievingly far apart, it is unacceptable.

 

2. 國務費案更一審已改判無罪

二00八年選後的「扁案」就是二00六年十一月高檢署查黑中心檢察官起訴的國務機要費案,但馬英九市長的特別費案也在二00七年二月同樣被高檢署查黑中心檢察官起訴。國務機要費是最早的特別費,只差在馬市長貪污起訴時,國民黨全黨力挺,並提名為總統候選人;國務機要費案被起訴時,民進黨採取切割策略,事後証明國務機要費和特別費都是「歷史共業」。

特別費案與國務機要費案都有使用他人發票及不實犒賞清冊的情形。馬英九將特別費存入自己的帳戶,並挪為私用,匯給太太周美青每月二十萬元、匯給姊姊馬以南三百萬元、支付女兒馬唯中在美刷卡消費,蔡守訓的合議庭以「金錢混同」及「大水庫理論」,判處馬英九無罪,但國務機要費用在機密外交等因公支出高達一億三千萬元,大於因公收入,則被蔡守訓的同一合議庭判處無期徒刑。二0一一年八月二十六日高院更一審改判貪污部分全部無罪。因國務機要費而起的「扁案」又如何會賠掉蔡英文二0一二年選舉?

The first “Abian case”, which was charged against me after the 2008 presidential election, started out with an indictment in Nov. 2006 by Taiwan High Prosecutors Office (THPO) regarding the use of presidential discretionary fund for national affairs. However, Ma, who was Taipei Mayor, was also indicted by THPO for his embezzlement of mayor discretionary fund. The presidential discretionary fund for national affairs is the earliest discretionary fund for government executives. The difference between the two cases is that when Mayor Ma was indicted, the whole KMT stood firmly behind him and nominated him as the presidential candidate for their party, while DPP chose to distant themselves by adopting a “sever-the-ties” tactic. Now, it has become clear that historically the use of both discretionary funds were governed by loosely defined rules(1).

In both cases, there was false bookkeeping with bogus receipts. Ma Yin-Jeou deposited the mayor discretionary fund into his private bank account. Each month, he wired NT$200,000 to his wife Chou Mei-Ching. He wired NT$3,000,000 to his sister Ma I-Nan. He paid for his daughter’s credit card charges with his discretionary fund. Tsai Sho-Shiun (the presiding judge) and his joint court acquitted Ma in the name of “mixed use of the fund” and “the Big Dam Theory”(2). However, the same joint court sentenced me to life in prison even though I provided proof for legitimate fund uses to conduct classified diplomatic missions, whose expenses totaled NT$130,000,000, an amount far exceeding the total amount of the presidential discretionary fund. On August 26, 2011, I was cleared for all the embezzlement charges by the first retrial ordered by the High Court.

Note(1): The congress controlled by KMT passed a new law to “forgive” all the misuse of discretionary funds by all high officials (mostly past KMT high officials), except President Chen and Vice President Lu. The law denotes the misuse as a “historically common practice”.

Note(2): “The Big Dam Theory” was invented by a pro-KMT attorney, Chen C-V, Managing Partner & Chief Counselor of Lee & Li Attorneys at Law to defend Ma. After Ma was found to deposit half of the discretionary fund to his personal bank account, he “denoted" the money he embezzled to his own foundation. “Judge” Tsai accepted his after-being-caught donation as a legitimate expense and adopted this “Big Dam Theory” to acquit Ma, claiming that as long as the total amount of legitimate expenses exceeds the total of the discretionary fund, it was legal. However, this Big Dam Theory was not applied to President Chen’s case by the very same judge even though there was no evidence that any money from the presidential discretionary fund was wired into the private bank account of President Chen.

 

3. 外交零用金案已還扁清白

「扁案」無罪定讞的外交零用金案,特偵組也是起訴侵占公物涉及貪污犯罪,可處無期徒刑,案經查明是檢察官拼湊、比附、臆測的羅織成獄,已還「扁案」的清白。

(3) I was acquitted for he charges of misuse of Diplomatic Mission Miscellaneous Fund

This embezzlement charge was pressed against me by the Special Prosecutors Panel (SPP) without merits, building on speculative and falsified evidences.

Note: The Supreme Court acquitted President Chen of guilt in US$330,000 Diplomatic Mission Miscellaneous Fund, supporting the decisions by the Taipei District Court and the Taiwan High Court on April 29, 2011.

 

4. 龍潭案屬違憲無效之判決

「扁案」除涉特別費的國務機要費外,其餘各案都是「選舉錢」,和「政治獻金」有關。差別卻是國民黨收取政治獻金是合法的選舉錢,「扁案」的政治獻金,不管是自己選總統或為黨所提名公職候選人募集的政治獻金,就被推定、擬制成有對價關係的貪污收賄。為了總統是否應到立院做國情報告,馬英九也說總統職權都規定在憲法裡頭。司法院大法官六二七號解釋釐清我國憲政體制下的總統與閣揆的職權,其中行政權概括授與行政院,總統職權以憲法及增修條文有列舉者為限。因此有關科學園區的開發、民營機構人事的決定、金融機構的合併均非總統的法定職權,「龍潭案」、「陳敏薰案」認定為總統職權判決有罪確定,顯屬違憲而無效之判決。

(4) Other “Abian Cases”, in addition to the one related to the presidential discretion fund, are all related to “campaign funds” and “political contributions”. The difference is that the political contributions accepted by KMT are considered as legitimate campaign funds, while all my campaign funds, either raised for two of my presidential elections or for candidates nominated by DPP for local elections, are considered as corruption and bribery money in exchange for equal valued political and policy favors from me. The Supreme Court Decision #627 clearly defined the powers of the President and the Premier of Executive Yuan under the current ROC Constitution. The Premier of Executive Yuan is in charge of executive functions of the government, while the President is in charge of those specific functions defined by the Constitution and Amendments. Consequently, the executive powers overseeing, for example, the development of research parks, personnel decision of private enterprises, and mergers of financial institutes are not parts of the presidential powers. In both the Long-Tiang case (1) and the Chen Min-Shin case(2), the judge reached guilt verdicts because the judge asserted that presidential powers were exercised in the decision makings of these two cases. This assertion is clearly unconstitutional and the guilt verdicts are therefore invalid.

Note(1): The Long-Tiang case is related to the development of a research park.

Note(2): The Chen Min-Shin case is related to the appointment of Chen Min-Shin as the head of Taipei 101 tower.

 

5. 一手拿扁獻金、一手與扁切割

至「二次金改案」一審以非總統職權,無對價關係的單純政治獻金判決無罪,二審則認定為總統職權,有對價關係的賄款,改判有罪並處重刑。事實上國泰蔡家及元大馬家的政治獻金都是選舉期間對外的募款,除二00四年總統大選的一億元外,其他全部用於二00一年縣市長、立委;二00二年北高市長及議員;二00四年立委;二00五年縣市長;二00六年北高市長及議員;二00八年立委等選舉的贊助款,包括二00一年、二00四年贊助台聯黨六千萬元,合共十三億元以上。對北高市長及縣市長競選經費挹注,有高達六千萬元、五千萬元、三千五百萬元、兩千萬元者。結果我拿的政治獻金是貪污的黑錢,我轉發給黨公職候選人及友黨的贊助款,似乎是應該的,不但自鳴清高,又要切割!

(5) As for the case of “Second Financial Reform”(1), I was acquitted in the first trial because the judge decided that my presidential powers were not directly involved in the decision making of the above “Financial Reform” and there were no promises of favors in exchange for political contributions from two banks involved in the “Financial Reform.” In fact, the political contributions from these two banks, Cathay Financial Holdings and Yuanta Financial Holdings, were parts of campaign contributions raised and used for election campaigns over the years. Among them, NT$100 million was used for the 2004 presidential election, while NT$1.3 billion was used for various elections, including county and city mayors elections in 2001, legislators election in 2002, 2005, and 2008, Taipie and Kaohsiung city mayors and city councilors elections in 2002 and 2006 for DPP candidates, as well as pledges to sponsor the candidates of the allied party, Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU), in 2001 and 2004 (NT$60 million). Specifically, the campaign funds I contributed to several Taipei and Kaohsiung mayors elections were as high as NT$60 million, 50 million, 35 million, and 20 million, respectively. However, these campaign funds I raised were all denounced as corruption and bribery “dirty money” by the prosecution. Some DPP and TSU candidates, while considering the same campaign funds that I contributed to them as their fair share, attempted to sever the ties with me to distinguish themselves as “clean” politicians.

Note(1): There were bank mergers involved in “Second Financial Reform” .

 

6. 南港案與扁無關

「扁案」的南港展覽館案,和我無關,既未起訴,也沒判罪。全案余政憲、吳淑珍改判圖利罪,尚未定讞。

(6). I am not connected to the Nan-Kong Case.

I have nothing to do with the Nan-Kong Exhibition Hall case, even though it is counted as one of the “Abian cases”. Neither I was not indicted, nor was I sentenced for it. The court found Yu Chan-Shen and Wu Shu-Jen guilty of attempting to profit from others, but the case is currently under apeal.

 

7. 錢匯海外為了卸任後作外交

所謂「海角七億」經判「洗錢」有罪部分,連同蔡銘哲姊弟七千萬元,不到三億元,其餘均非「不法所得」。監察院有關宋楚瑜興票案的調查報告明確指出,政治獻金的選舉剩餘款是候選人的個人財產,縱使宋楚瑜用三、四十個人頭匯到海外三億八千萬元,亦不成立洗錢犯罪。宋楚瑜選省長未據實申報競選經費,只報了一億元,卻剩餘六億二千萬元,其中三億八千萬元匯往國外,宋辯稱是夫人理財。吳淑珍將選舉剩餘款匯存海外,是為了方便未來作為台灣國際外交及公共用途的使用,其中一筆未遭扣押的一百九十萬美元交給吳澧培資政推動機密外交之用,特偵組起訴吳澧培參與洗錢,業已獲判無罪確定。

(7). The funds I stashed overseas were intended for diplomatic missions after my presidency.

Among the so called “Oversea NT$700 million”, the court decided that only less than NT$300 million was involved with money laundering, including NT$70 million which was related to Tsai Ming-Tse and his sister. The rest of the fund is found to be legal. When the Examination Yuan investigated James Soong for his role in the Shin-Piau Money Laundering case, the Examination Yuan affirmed that unspent campaign fund legally became personal property of the candidate after the election. Because of this legal affirmation, James Soong was not found guilty of money laundering even though he wired NT$380 million to the US using the identities of thirty to forty people. James Soong, the former Governor of Taiwan, reported to the election board that he only raised NT$100 million campaign fund. In fact, his unspent campaign fund alone exceeded NT$620 million. Soong claimed that he was unaware of it because it was his wife who managed the campaign fund. My wife, Wu Shu-Jen, wired unspent campaign funds to oversea banks with an intention to use them for diplomatic missions for Taiwan and for public affairs. In fact, a sum of US$1.9 million was given to Mr. Wu Li-Pei, a former member of National Affairs Council, for classified diplomatic missions. The Special Prosecution Panel indicted Mr. Wu Li-Pei for participating in money laundering but he was acquitted of any wrong doings.

 

8. 扁案是中共的統戰分化陰謀

「扁案」的政治本質,是國共兩黨聯手打扁的政治追殺。胡錦濤於二00八年六月召開政治局擴大會議時就說,從二00六年起中國國安部就發現扁家在海外存款證據,並轉交給台灣當局;又說「根據我們掌控的情況,陳水扁很快就會被逮捕,他的被捕將給台獨勢力造成重大打擊」。二00八年七月,中共對台工作辦公室為實施《解決台灣問題的政治戰略》,定出具體方案要打擊陳水扁及其親信團夥,加深民進黨內部的思想裂痕,使民進黨長期處於政治思想的混亂狀況,極大減弱其阻碍「我們二0一二年解決台灣問題的政治動力」。特別強調陳水扁是台獨勢力最主要的政治象徵之一,打擊陳水扁不僅可以將其本人釘在歷史的恥辱柱上,而在社會道德意義上,可以給台獨意識沉重的打擊。遺憾的是,民進黨的切割派對中國以胡錦濤為首的倒扁陰謀竟然視若無睹,落入中共的統戰分化而不自知。

9. 北檢檢察官認定馬金干預司法

民視《頭家來開講》主持人謝志偉及來賓游盈隆、洪裕宏、陳立宏、王時齊,在二0一0年的節目中指述馬英九與金溥聰以政治力影響「扁案」、國民黨立委以刪除預算干預司法個案,遭到國民黨提告加重毀謗、妨害選舉。台北地檢署檢察官日前認定,當年馬英九的確在「扁案」宣判前(十一月八日)宴請司法檢察高層,並發布新聞稿指「尊重司法不等於漠視人民對於部分法官作出違背人民合理期待判決的失望與憤怒」,謝志偉等人以總統邀宴動作與聲明質疑總統干預司法,並非沒有相當理由,因而處分五位電視名嘴不起訴。益証連檢察官也肯認金馬干預司法,介入「扁案」的偵審,我才會在「二次金改案」一審無罪六天後,最高法院旋即自行判決確定「龍潭案」及「陳敏薰案」並發監執行。

(9). Taipei District Prosecutors found Ma and Kim (1) interfered with the judicial independence.

The fact that even prosecutors acknowledged the judicial interference by Ma and Kim, it becomes clear why only six days after I was acquitted for the charges of the “Second Financial Reform Case”, the Taiwan High Court unilaterally (2) reached two guilty verdicts for the “Long-Tiang Case” and the “Chen Min-Shin Case” and sent me to jail immediately without giving me rights to appeal.

Note(1): Kim was the head of KMT at the time. He is a close friend of Ma.

Note(2): The Taiwan High Court reached the guilt verdicts for these two cases in a unprecedented manner. Usually, the High Court returns the case back to a lower court for retrial if it does not agree with the verdict of the lower court.

 

10. 文革的扁案:毛澤東鬥爭劉少奇

回顧「扁案」的偵辦過程,不難聯想文革期間毛澤東清算鬥爭他內定的接班人劉少奇,儘管「劉案」與「扁案」相隔四十年,一在「中國」一在「台灣」,但兩個中國黨對付政治異己的殘酷手段並無二致。

一九六六年毛澤東在一張報紙寫上「炮打司令部─我的一張大字報」,接著紅衛兵就到被打成「黨內最大的資本主義道路和當權派」的劉宅,貼大字報、掛標語、呼口號,並將他和妻子王光美拖出去批鬥。為了置劉少奇於「永世不得翻身」的死地,江青等獲悉劉少奇在一九二九年、三十一歲時曾從事工人運動,於奉天紗廠被捕過,硬扣上「判徒、內奸、二賊」三頂大帽子。一九六七年花了五十天大查一九二九年前後的檔案資料,並未發現劉少奇所謂「叛變」的証據。遂成立專案小組,虛構劉的叛變情節,只要活著又任過職務的就列為重點「知情人」(証人),即使神智不清的人也找來作証,專案小組尚未調查,就先劃框框、定調子,先想定劉少奇「叛變自首」有罪,不是有沒有的問題,而是查出來查不出來的問題。辦案人對証人威逼恫嚇、疲勞審問、押人取供、教唆偽證,直到証人俯首就範,先後有四位証人因受不了而自殺未遂。一份劉少奇被捕後叛變的偽証就這樣出籠,二年後劉少奇含冤而死,文革結束才獲得平反。

11. 辜、杜兩人證實特偵組脅迫咬扁

「扁案」在二00八年政治追殺時,特偵組檢察官一字排開召開記者會,宣示扁案「辦不出來就走人」;接著法務部長王清峰向國民黨秘書長吳敦義報告,隨即大肆搜索、押人取供;行政院長劉兆玄更在立法院答詢時預告陳水扁很快會被收押。檢察官涉嫌教唆証人咬扁,杜麗萍在法庭坦承她的自殺未遂是檢察官以收押脅迫的結果;辜仲諒在紅火案高院庭訊時和他的律師及財務長供述,他在特偵組時,檢察官要他作不利扁的偽証,事實上紅火案的三億未流入扁家;李界木也被檢察官威脅利誘,如不配合,將讓他傾家蕩產。特偵組起訴後,承審周占春合議庭兩次無保釋放我,卻以人為方式,公然違背法官法定原則,硬給換了下來,改由判決馬英九特別費案無罪的蔡守訓合議庭審理,無視對我有利証據,甚至隱匿「奉天專案」的機密文件,鎖在保險箱不拿出來;共同被告及証人都說我有政治獻金,並有選舉剩餘款,蔡守訓硬拗說「沒有」,就是要定我的罪,先判無期徒刑再說。

(11). Koo and Du testified that they were threatened and coerced to testify against me.

In 2008, in the beginning of the prosecution of the “Abian Cases”, the prosecutors of the Special Prosecution Panel called a news conference and boldly pledged that they would resign if they could not bring a conviction of me. Following this news conference, the Justice Minister, Wang Ching-Feng, briefed the case to the secretariat of KMT, Wu Dun-I. Soon after, the prosecutors started an all-out investigation and placed witnesses under custody to build their case against me. The Premier of Executive Yuan, Liu Chao-Shien, even predicted, in response to legislators’ questioning, that I would be soon placed under custody. It is evident that prosecutors harassed and coerced witnesses to testify against me. For example, Du Li-Ting admitted, during a court hearing, that her attempted suicide was a result of harassment and threats by the prosecution. Jeffrey Koo Jr., his lawyer and CFO of his company testified in a High Court hearing of the “Red Fire Case” that the Special Prosecution Panel asked Koo to testify against me. Koo’s lawyers confirmed that Koo did not remit NT$300 million bribe money to me as accused.(1)

Lee Tsei-Mu (2) was threatened by the prosecution to testify against me or he would be severely punished to an extent that he would lose all of his estates.

After the Special Prosecution Panel brought the charges against me, Judge Chou Chan-Tsun twice released me without bail, but Judge Chou was replaced by Tsai Sho-Shiun and the joint court he assembled through an executive order, a violation of the principle of “Legally Assigned Judge” (3). Tsai Sho-Shiun, who acquitted Ma of the Mayor Discretion Fund case, intentionally ignored the evidences in favor of me and even hid an important piece of evidence related to classified documents of “Fong-Ten Project”, locking it away in a safe to keep it out of the court hearing. Despite all witnesses testified that I owned substantial unspent campaign funds and political contributions, Tsai Sho-Shium simply proclaimed “There were none!” and sentenced me to life in prison, fulfilling his guilty prejudgment.

Note(1): Koo’s lawyers admitted Koo’s false testimony in May 2011.

Note(2): Lee Tsei-Mu was convicted of accepting bribery money for the development project of the Long-Tiang Research Park. There are video recordings of his questioning and interviewing by the prosecutors in which the prosecutors clearly threatened him to provide damaging testimonies.

Note(3): Article #16 of Taiwan Constitution provides constitutional litigation right to people. This Article emphasizes that in order to protect the constitutional litigation right, the selection process to assign a presiding judge must follow an impartial and open drawing procedure. This is the core value of the principle of legally assigned judge. It is unconstitutional to remove the legally assigned judge through an executive order. Taipei District Court removed the legally assigned judge Chou Chan-Tsun and installed Judge Tsai Sho-Shuin by an executive order based on the decision of a meeting among chief justices subject to external influences without abiding by the rule of law.

 

12. 扁案何時雲開見月明

劉少奇在共產中國,再大的冤抑還能平反;在民主台灣的「扁案」,何時可以雲開見月明?「民進黨那裡努力不夠?」答案就在這裡。

陳水扁 2012. 02. 09
Chen Shui Bian, 2-9-2012

( Note:It was thanks to Mr. Jay Tu that this article translated into English. – Taiwan eNews)

金恒煒: 陳水扁自始無罪, 只要政黨再輪替,炮製扁案的背後那一大堆狗屁倒灶見不得人之髒事與髒手都會一一現形,扁案的政治誅殺會寫在民主史上。

金恒煒:  陳水扁自始無罪, 只要政黨再輪替,炮製扁案的背後那一大堆狗屁倒灶見不得人之髒事與髒手都會一一現形,扁案的政治誅殺會寫在民主史上。

陳水扁自始無罪

「國務機要費案」是扁案的核心,也是藍營、紅營發動倒扁的根據,現在高等法院更一審出爐,改判前總統陳水扁及第一夫人吳淑珍無罪。判決結果不僅動搖藍營控扁貪腐的基礎,也展露馬政府用司法誅殺扁家的事實,難怪有藍委氣到語無倫次,藍營媒體的社論只能使出「豈有此理」的罵街口吻。

幾乎所有媒體都用「逆轉」或「大逆轉」做為形容詞,事實確實如此。「國務機要費案」一審判無期徒刑,二審判二十年有期徒刑,到更一審宣判無罪,當然是翻轉且否定了一審、二審的判決。

更一審合議庭的判決庭長沈宜生、受命法官賴邦元及陪審法官吳炳桂都強調他們心中「只有法律,沒有藍綠」,言下是不是或有沒有指著和尚罵禿驢?大家可以研判,但接受訪問時表示:「這個判決要在十年、廿年後,仍禁得起法學界、實務界的檢驗,絕不會被政治因素所影響」云云,絕對是意有所指,也確有其用心。

更一審合議庭首先取消了「特偵組」的指控,形同打出「特偵組」是「扁偵組」的原形,那麼,起訴陳前總統自是「羅織成罪」。其次,也自是對抗及挑戰一審蔡守訓等法官與二審鄧振球等法官的恐龍判決。更一審法官信誓旦旦說:「不會被政治因素所影響」,是不是指責「特偵組」及一審、二審法官?不然為什麼用如此嚴重的字眼指控。

確實,沈宜生等法官是把自己放在正義的天秤上與蔡守訓們及鄧振球們相比:誰禁得起檢驗誰禁不起?誰受政治力操縱誰沒有?誰的判決合乎法理、實情誰違反?歸根究柢,就是陳前總統自始無罪。

沈宜生們很悲觀,要等「十年、二十年後」來證成;透露了法官的無奈以及台灣司法不可承受的痛。老實說,不必那麼悲觀,只要政黨再輪替,炮製扁案的背後那一大堆狗屁倒灶見不得人之髒事與髒手都會一一現形,扁案的政治誅殺會寫在民主史上。

(作者金恒煒,當代雜誌總編輯)

律師, 本土社團: 扁案自始至終就是政治介入的結果,其他已定讞的部分應該重新審判。當初涉嫌濫訴、重判的特偵組檢察官及法官蔡守訓等人,更應接受查處。 ..「現在如何審判陳水扁,未來就如何審判馬英九」。

律師, 本土社團: 扁案自始至終就是政治介入的結果,其他已定讞的部分應該重新審判。當初涉嫌濫訴、重判的特偵組檢察官及法官蔡守訓等人,更應接受查處。  ..「現在如何審判陳水扁,未來就如何審判馬英九」。

扁國務費案/本土社團籲追究濫訴、違法重判

〔記者曾韋禎/台北報導〕前總統陳水扁國務費案有關貪污部分逆轉改判無罪,本土社團昨召開記者會指出,這是遲來的正義,扁案其他已定讞的判決也應重審,當初涉嫌濫訴、重判的特偵組檢察官及法官蔡守訓等人,更應接受查處。

指政治介入扁案 已定讞案應該重審

律師鄭文龍指出,國務費貪污案從被判無期徒刑、徒刑廿年,到改判無罪,凸顯扁案的偵辦過程出現政治追殺、政治審判及政治干預。律師洪貴參說,扁案自始至終就是政治介入的結果,其他已定讞的部分應該重新審判。  洪貴參認為,立法院已修法讓特別費除罪化,國務費部分因政治因素而刻意遭排除,才會出現還有偽造文書罪的怪相。

鄭文龍解釋,陳水扁當初說的支出,後來都證明確實存在;去年十一月五日二次金改案獲判無罪,馬英九總統竟在十一月九日宴請司法院正副院長、秘書長,提醒司法判決不能「自外於人民」,已是公然干涉司法,現在怎麼還敢說他沒干預過司法?

律師︰特偵組、蔡守訓 司院應查處

鄭文龍認為,特偵組、蔡守訓等涉嫌濫權、違法重判,監察院、司法院應對其進行查處,特偵組也可以關閉了。

台灣社社長吳樹民質疑,醫師要因為誤診而吃官司,為什麼台灣的法官無須為錯誤判決而負責?台灣人民要的是公平,「現在如何審判陳水扁,未來就如何審判馬英九」。

台灣客社社長張葉森質疑,李慶安雙重國籍案獲判無罪,可能是為了幫馬英九的綠卡解套;陳水扁國務費無罪,也可能是馬英九怕卸任後遭到追殺,才有此判決。他很不願這樣推測,但台灣司法的公信力確有待提升。

陳致中: 背負扁家的原罪,一定會更堅強,也堅信公道自在人心,2012年第三次政黨輪替必將實現。

陳致中: 背負扁家的原罪,一定會更堅強,也堅信公道自在人心,2012年第三次政黨輪替必將實現。

 

按: 原罪一词来自基督教的传说,它是指人类生而俱来的、洗脱不掉的“罪行”。圣经中讲:人有两种罪——原罪与本罪,原罪是始祖犯罪所遗留的罪性与恶根,本罪是各人今生所犯的罪

 

被拱選立委 陳致中要和扁商量

中央社 更新日期:2011/08/18 14:19
 

(中央社記者王淑芬、程啟峰高雄18日電)無黨籍高雄市議員陳致中今天召開記者會說,行政院連夜火速解除他市議員職務是政治判決、政治整肅。對支持民眾高喊「選立委」,陳致中說,要和父親陳水扁商量再決定。

 

陳致中上午10時召開記者會,9時不到服務處就湧入很多關心的支持者,立委許添財、民進黨立委參選人趙天麟,以及多名民主進步黨籍市議員也到場。

 

陳致中於10時現身服務處,面對群眾的加油打氣及高喊「討公道、選立委」,他頻頻表示感謝。

 

陳致中隨後發表聲明表示,此案雖不符易科罰金,但仍可易服社會勞動折算,應該以此補充解釋地方制度法規定。他說,在法律解釋仍存有重大疑義的情形下,行政院連夜火速逕依地制法解職,令人懷疑政治動機。

 

他說,這是政治追殺到一種殺紅了眼的程度,他及選民及台灣人民都不能接受此結果。

 

他說,背負扁家的原罪,一定會更堅強,也堅信公道自在人心,2012年第三次政黨輪替必將實現。

 

對支持者高喊「選立委」,陳致中表示會和父親商量,並聽聽大家的意見,做出決定後會向支持者報告。1000818(中央社記者程啟峰高雄攝 100年8月18日)

陳致中解職 謝長廷:人生起伏

更新日期:2011/08/18 05:30

(中央社記者葉素萍台北17日電)前行政院長謝長廷今天赴電影院觀賞國片「翻滾吧!阿信」,被詢及前總統陳水扁兒子陳致中因偽證案判刑定讞,將遭解除議員職權一事,他指著電影海報說「人生過程起起伏伏」。

高雄市議員陳致中因涉偽證,今天經最高法院判處有期徒刑3月定讞。內政部表示,依地方制度法,行政院收到法院判決書後,由行政院發函當事人及高雄市議會,自判決日起解除職權。

謝長廷晚間出席觀賞台灣長工會包場的國片「翻滾吧!阿信」,觀影過程,戲院放映設備兩度出問題,螢幕畫面全黑,讓觀眾等待10多分鐘。

謝長廷在電影放映後與電影製片李烈及片中演員座談。從小學體操的謝長廷說,看完電影感覺「腳都痛起來了」,他開玩笑地說「好在我後來轉行」,希望各界多關心體育、多關心電影。

民進黨立委參選人趙士強也到場觀影,被李烈點名上台分享觀影心得。趙士強除了提到體育環境待改善、毒品問題要處理,也不忘強調「25年前我和男主角一樣有六塊肌」,讓現場哄堂大笑;謝長廷則拿電影劇情調侃趙士強,如果以後當選立委應立法「黑道打架不要拿棒球棒」。

李烈說,「翻滾吧!阿信」是展現台灣人精神的電影,希望年輕的孩子們都能一直向前,也希望提醒社會各界關注運動員、舞蹈家等專業人士所面臨的處境。

另外,謝長廷被媒體詢及陳致中遭解職一事,他只說了「人生過程起起伏伏啦,今天看電影,不談這個」。1000817