糾正黃郁婷事件是監院天職

自由廣場》（金恒煒專欄）糾正黃郁婷事件是監院天職 2022/02/24 05:30 代表國家隊到北京參加冬奧的黃郁婷，離正式開賽兩周前的春節發文向中國拋媚眼，要微博「網友幫忙打call（加油）」，隔一周穿起中國隊運動服示眾，大剌剌以「運動無國籍」公然舔中。我們要責問的是，代表團總領隊陳士魁當下竟沒有制止，也沒有向體育署報備。難怪黃郁婷狗膽越來越大，開幕接受《北京日報》訪問時，「在主場比賽」的屁話都敢宣之於口。 黃郁婷爭議二月三日見報後，中華奧會仍安排她出任開幕式台灣代表團掌旗官。什麼跟什麼啊。體育署也好、「中華奧會」也好、總領隊也好，第一、第二、第三時間完全沒有作為。體育署副署長林哲宏還替黃背書說「敏感度不足」，不會處罰。群情憤激下，行政院長蘇貞昌十九日下令教育部、體育署針對黃不當言行進行調查、處分。接著，總統府發言支持行政院。再接下來教育部長潘文忠說話了。但陳士魁虛以委蛇，說四月才要進行檢討，而且表示：「判刑也要先有相關法規才能執行」，言下就是辦不了。院長見有關單位推諉不決，重申前令，部長潘文忠再度重話，宣告兩周內做出決定和處分。 有趣沒有趣？從黃郁婷發難到閣揆說話歷二十五天之久，迫使府院部同時出手，體育署以下竟要拖到四月才辦，部長遂下令體育署，兩周不到搞定。最後會如何處置？誰知道。滑冰協會秘書長吳倫閑強調，「若黃郁婷已真心悔改，我們也不會扼殺她的選手生涯」云云。黃沒有悔不悔改的餘地，嚴重犯紀已鑄成。舉個實例。德國雪橇滑手娜塔莉·蓋森伯格（Natalie Geisenberger）回國後對媒體說，她永遠不會再去中國，「並不是我想去中國，而是國際奧委會決定讓北京主辦奧運會」，接著譴責國際奧委會將冬奧主辦權交給「人權記錄惡劣」的中國。蓋森伯格是雪橇滑手，黃郁婷是滑冰選手，兩人有得比；不同的是，蓋森伯格可是本屆冬奧金牌得主，不像黃郁婷落到二十四名去。德國選手殷殷以「人權」為念，如Isaiah Berlin所說：「人權就是民主」；黃郁婷把無人權、反民主的中國當成「主場」，唱和中國武嚇台灣。 問題來了。黃郁婷出線，有嚴密審查程序嗎？黃郁婷的父親不但兼教練且父女以「Hope溜冰鞋」在中國大賺其錢；Hope正是黃郁婷的英文名字。逐利於中國的一家人有資格代表國家嗎？難怪黃郁婷步步走來荒腔走板。誰該負責？再看大一點的課題。政府宣布杯葛奧運開幕，與國際許多民主國家同步，不旋踵間又食言而肥。朝三暮四，施政如兒戲！誰該負責？ 黃郁婷事件暴露台灣民主憲政的難局。在黨政獨大、行政立法同步下，官僚體制一旦胡整亂搞，我們別有制衡的機制嗎？有。多個民間社團看不下去，決定到監察院提出檢舉，要求監院調查、糾正。現在球到了監院手上，監院能盡責嗎？ 立院立馬磨刀要修憲，廢監院是重頭戲。不過以修憲門檻之高，一定成不了局。監院該不該廢？有沒有存在價值？則是核心議題；民間社團的檢舉函正提供監委展現風骨，藉此說服人民監院存在有理的價值；這是監院的機會，也是轉機。 （作者金恒煒為政治評論者；http://wenichin.blogspot.tw/）

「二十大」尚未開幕 就被林為洲、陳以信砸了鍋

自由廣場》﹙金恒煒專欄﹚「二十大」尚未開幕 就被林為洲、陳以信砸了鍋 2022/02/17 05:30 中國怎麼了？對國民黨立委林為洲、陳以信開鍘？《人民政協報》重砲轟擊林為洲和陳以信是「暗獨」，是勾結反華勢力的代表人物，說這股「暗獨」勢力比起民進黨的「明獨」更加破壞兩岸關係。言下之意是，林為洲、陳以信比民進黨還惡質！這不但新鮮而且有趣，其中必有玄機。 話說一月九日中國發動聲勢浩大的宣傳，動用「央視網」、「中新網」、「環球網」等三大媒體，藉海協會副會長孫亞夫宣告二〇二二年「兩岸關係」 出現新變化 ，「二十大」將提出「未來五年對台工作」的新決策：孫亞夫首先駁斥民進黨所說「九二共識」這一頁已經翻過去了，表示「我覺得它是翻不過去的」；第二，「國民黨現在還表示認同『九二共識』，那就要堅持一個中國原則。」第三，「對美鬥爭艱苦，但我們頂住了美國的攻勢，……而且還發展得挺好。」第四，「繼續團結老百姓也是打擊台獨的一個方面。」 發聲明外，中國也積極部署。先看台灣的「和聲」。孫亞夫話聲剛完，蘇起馬上如響斯應，在〔二零二二年兩岸關係展望〕的「台北論壇」開講：今年兩岸關係「外弛內張」，中共解決台灣問題，不再是「一國兩制、台灣方案」，兩岸談判已經沒有了，而是中共單方面一次處理，這是定調云云。這些話能不能坐實隔海聲援孫亞夫？「定調」二字重要，正是不打自招。不僅如此。蘇起特別強調中共年底「廿大」將提「新時代黨解決台灣問題總體方案」來解決台灣問題，所謂「外弛內張 」，就是孫亞夫「和統與武統」並用的恫嚇。 中國不會只有「空言」而沒有「行事」；他們把重點放在最容易、最不費吹灰之力的「團結老百姓也是打擊台獨的一個方面」。開年以來，動作不斷。官媒央視製作的歌曲「我們同唱一首歌」，委由台灣的方文山填詞，並拉台灣藝人蕭敬騰、歐陽娜娜、陳立農與中國歌手合唱。接著台灣藝人方芳在中國中央廣播電視總台接受訪問，鼓吹兩岸統一，將台灣比成「小孩子」，希望「祖國」在「小孩」不講理時出手打兩巴掌。再用央視的春節聯歡晚會，刻意標出「中國台灣」藝人蕭敬騰、張韶涵、楊宗緯、李立群和中國演員陳曉結婚的陳妍希一起上節目。那麼北京冬奧台灣選手黃郁婷、林欣蓉、李玟儀全異口同聲「舔中」，郝明義認定那是中國「精心策劃」的。至於洪秀柱應邀出席北京冬奧開幕，中國全國政協主席汪洋特別召見表示願與台灣展開「民主協商」。凡此種種作為，就是要烘托台灣新決策的出爐，不料被林為洲與陳以信兩個小子給毀了。 林為洲說「九二共識……壽終正寢。」又說：「……台灣只能靠向美國，毫無選擇」。陳以信到美國與台灣駐美大使蕭美琴會面，又前往國會山莊拜會多位聯邦眾議員。「二十大」尚未揭幕、中國對台的新決策尚未正式出爐，就被林為洲與陳以信先砸了招牌。這就是「暗獨」比「明獨」更可惡的原因！ （作者金恒煒為政治評論者；http://wenichin.blogspot.tw/）

一下子搞掉日美兩國，厲害了，國民黨！

自由廣場》（金恒煒專欄）一下子搞掉日美兩國，厲害了，國民黨！ 2022/02/10 05:30 「老狗玩不出新把戲」，這句話放在國民黨身上貼切極了。國民黨「反福食」玩的伎倆與「反美豬」有何不同？把「福食」打成「核食」的手法一如把「美豬」打成「萊豬」。現在馬英九又喊出「反核食公投」。四大公投包括「反萊豬」全輸了，馬英九還要帶著國民黨繼續「再公投」一次？先要問嚇破膽的黨主席朱立倫敢不敢應命？老狗玩老把戲，不怕反被老把戲玩死。 日本福島核災區食品進口的消息甫傳出，國民黨第一時間沒有反對，只表示「日本若能保證進口食品安全，就同意核食進口」云云，馬上被「戰鬥藍」趙少康打臉，要求黨主席朱立倫說清楚立場。趙少康一叫陣，朱立倫不敢再隱身「黨中央」幕後，立刻改口說：「國民黨對於任何有可能傷害國人健康一絲一毫，絕對百分之百反對，一定會與全民站在一起。」真的有夠孬種。等到行政院正式宣布開放福食，朱立倫不得不怒飆：「核食有害」，國民黨反對到底！ 國民黨「反福食」或說「反核食」有沒有效？夠不夠力？能不能讓執政黨收回成命？要不要訴諸公投？都是餘話，馬上的效應是惹怒了日本。《產經新聞》駐台支部局長矢板明夫在臉書上說了重話：「聽到一些台灣在野黨的人士說，日本東北災區的食品是有毒的，對身體有害的。作為一個住在台灣的日本記者，我認為這種說法，是對日本政府、日本媒體，以及全體日本國民的一種侮辱。」國民黨不過耍耍嘴皮子，卻大大侮辱了友邦日本。國民黨反日固然其來有自，現在得罪日本卻勢頭不對。 問題是，只停在口水階段，就坐實侮辱「全體日本國民」之罪；那麼像盧秀燕那樣，不顧外交禮儀「突襲」禮貌來拜會台中市的美國在台協會處長酈英傑，當面嗆聲反對「含有萊克多巴胺的豬肉進口」，弄得AIT不得不發出聲明稿駁斥盧秀燕「散播不實資訊」，引發「毫無根據的焦慮」。美國政府會不生氣嗎？何況這不是國民黨單一孤例。美國衛生部長阿札爾來訪，國民黨副秘書長謝龍介抹黑「阿札爾是瘦肉精老闆」；國務院次卿柯拉克訪台，國民黨率眾到機場「抗議美豬」；AIT邀請國民黨立委們餐敘，黨主席江啟臣以團進團出拒絕與會。更不必說美國駐聯合國大使克拉芙特（Kelly Craft）率團訪台，國民黨立院黨團總召費鴻泰以「惡客」加以羞辱。國民黨的惡言詈罵，美國人不生氣才怪。 惹惱日本、侮辱日本，惹惱美國、侮辱美國；一下子把對台灣最重要的兩個國家得罪光了。國民黨還要做外交嗎？現在妄想到華盛頓重開聯絡辦事處？美國豈是獃子。這還不說，國民黨獨獨對中國卑躬屈膝。洪秀柱刻意到北京磕冬奧之頭，朱立倫替她背書：「對話交流總比對抗交惡來得好太多了」。為美豬、為福食，寧交惡不交流，搞掉日美兩國，只對中國「網開一面」，孤獨一條路走到紅。厲害了，國民黨！？ （作者金恒煒為政治評論者；http://wenichin.blogspot.tw/）

Stop covering for Yen Ching-piao

Home Editorials Mon, Feb 07, 2022 page8 Stop covering for Yen Ching-piao By Chin Heng-wei 金恒煒 A re-election is reportedly to be held for the board of Dajia Jenn Lann Temple (大甲鎮瀾宮) in Taichung’s Dajia District (大甲), although few details are available. That a board re-election for a legal entity such as a temple is shrouded in mystery, with the secrecy even extending to something as fundamental as the temple’s charter, is deeply suspicious, leaving some people to presume that there is something dishonest going on. Former Non-Partisan Solidarity Union legislator Yen Ching-piao (顏清標), who allegedly has links to the criminal underworld, has been the temple’s chairman for more than two decades. Whether he would continue in the job, and how he would indefinitely cling to such a lucrative position, would largely depend on the “perpetual board members” he holds sway over. Yen’s grip on the temple is not news, and there had seemed to be little that anybody could do about it. Fortunately, the legislative recall and subsequent by-election in Taichung’s second electoral district has forced people to look more closely at the situation. It has refocused minds on questions such as how Yen came to be temple chairman and how he has been able to use the organization as his personal wallet. It is up to the government to investigate these matters. During the by-election campaign, Yi Chin-jung (易錦隆), a local community representative on the temple’s management committee, brought up a raft of questions on Yen’s role. The first of these concerned the regulation in the temple’s charter that board members must have their household registration in Taichung’s Dajia, Houli (后里), Daan (大安) or Waipu (外埔) districts, and how Yen has long been registered in Shalu District (沙鹿) and was registered there in 1999 when he first became chairman. He now resides in Dajia, but he only moved there last year, so his holding the chairmanship clearly runs counter to the regulations of the charter. Another question raised by Yi concerned how Yen had revised the charter to allow for the addition of four board members that he had himself appointed. There is little point in asking the Taichung Civil Affairs Bureau to investigate how Yen was elected as temple chairman. When asked by reporters, Deputy Minister of the Interior Chen Tsung-yen (陳宗彥) told them to refer to the temple’s charter if they wanted to find out whether Yen’s role as chairman was legitimate, adding that the Taipei City Council had asked for a copy of the temple’s charter from the city government, but the city government declined to provide it. After the bureau rebuffed Yi’s request, the central government got involved, and Taichung Civil Affairs Bureau Director Wu Shih-wei (吳世瑋) called a news conference, telling the media that the charter does not clearly state a residency requirement. This was followed by a barrage of questions about what the charter does say on the matter. Wu responded by citing Article 18 of the Freedom of Government Information Act (政府資訊公開法), which states that information about trade secrets or business operations of a person, legal person or group can be withheld. That is just plain claptrap. The act does have a section titled “Restrictions on Publication of Government Information,” of which Article 18 is a major part, but Clause 3 of that article says that certain documents “can be made available to the public or be provided if deemed necessary to the public interest,” and Clause 9 says that documents “necessary for the public interest” can be made available. Of course, the charter of the Dajia Jenn Lann Temple lies within what is “necessary to the public interest.” News reports said that on the day of the Jan. 9 Taichung by-election, Yen did not turn out to vote, and many assumed he was in the hospital and unable to vote. It was later reported that, knowing that the temple was to hold a chairperson election, Yen transferred his household registration to Dajia District in May last year. If the temple’s charter does not specify that a person must reside in a given district to qualify as chair, why would Yen have made the unnecessary move to Dajia, especially as it meant moving his household registration from his family’s traditional stronghold and waiving the right to vote in his son’s by-election? Could Yen be that stupid? The first error was for Wu to cite that particular clause, apparently without thinking it through; the second was for Yen to have transferred his household registration when he did. The combination of these mistakes shows that the Taichung City Government was covering up for the Yen family. To a degree, the point is moot. Yen is not qualified to be a board member of Dajia Jenn Lann Temple, or play a supervisory role, let alone be the temple chairman. Article 42 of the Foundations Act (財團法人法) states that no person “shall be appointed as the chairperson, alternate chairperson or a supervisor of a public-endowed foundation” if they have “been rendered with a final judgement of guilty for committing an offense under the Statute for Prevention of Organizational Crimes,” and if appointed, they must be removed from office. In 1987, Yen was imprisoned for three years for a conviction due to links with organized crime, links which he has admitted to in media interviews. In the end, it does not really matter what the temple charter says: The city government can no longer cover up for the Yen family. The only thing now is for Yen to be removed from office. Chin Heng-wei is a political commentator. Translated by Paul Cooper