Photo: On May 11, in the fourth cluster of Review Meeting of the ROC’s Third Report under the ICCPR and ICESCR, the review committee is concerned about the current human rights situation such as freedom of domestic relocation, prohibited exiting the country due to taxation issues, called administrative enforcement, expulsions of foreigners, refugee act, the principle of recusal of judges, and procedural rights in judicial proceedings.

 

May 15, 2022

 

NGO Groups Criticize National Report for cover-up

On May 11, in the fourth cluster of the Review Meeting of the ROC’s Third Report under the ICCPR and ICESCR, Articles 12 to 17 of the ICCPR and Concluding Observations 68 to 72 were reviewed. The review committee is concerned about the current human rights situation such as freedom of domestic relocation, prohibited exiting the country due to taxation issues, called administrative enforcement, expulsions of foreigners, refugee act, the principle of recusal of judges, and procedural rights in judicial proceedings. Many NGO representatives attending the Review Meeting expressed their concern that the government's aim to hide the truth is the main reason to hinder human rights progress in Taiwan. 

 

Peer Lorenzen, Danish, ex-section president of European Court of Human Rights, was concerned about Article 14 of the ICCPR, the procedural rights in court proceedings, and raises the issues of judge impartiality, recusal judges, and legal procedures. Peer Lorenzen believes that to achieve justice and fairness, the most important thing is that the legal system must be functioning. In Taiwan's current legal system, judge impartiality, recusal judges, etc. issues come up where the judge has made a decision too narrow.

 

The NGO representative pointed out that, with regard to Article 14 of the ICCPR, the procedural rights in judicial proceedings, the problem of recusal of judges often occurs in practice in Taiwan, with repeating the presiding judge from the previous trial of the lower court to the next trial of the higher court, and the verdict is often unfavorable to the defendant. This completely violates the principle of impartial tribunal guaranteed by Article 14 of the ICCPR. In the case of retrial in terms of administrative litigation there's a five-year limit, as a result transitional justice cannot be pursued. Administrative litigation as a remedy for state violence and the abuse of the state power, therefore, the government should not use the statute of limitations to dodge its responsibility. In such, administrative litigation should follow the example of criminal litigation where there's no statute of limitations.

 

The representative of the United Nations/NGO Association of World Citizens pointed out that the government has violated the right to liberty of movement and freedom to choose his residence in Article 12 of the ICCPR. He stated that the government administrative actions violated this principle, including the use of administrative power to deprive people of their personal liberty and property without a court decision, are against the ICCPR. If the government believe that there's hidden assets of the people and then they can forbid people from leaving the country to work or unite with their families, the state power is too great, which infringes human rights greatly. Only one or two percent of the tax paid through forbidding people from leaving the country account for the total tax debt so I believe that this case infringe the right to liberty of movement greatly.

 

During the Review Meeting, there was a huge gap between the government's response and the remarks of NGOs. Regards expulsion, the chairman of the fourth cluster Manfred Nowak, professors of International Law at various universities and International Human Rights at the University of Vienna, heard, from the government that the principle of Article 13 of the ICCPR is included in the Immigration Act but from Amnesty International and other NGOs that current article nine of the Immigration Act there is no mentioning of the principle of Article 13 of the ICCPR. Professor Manfred said that he wants to the know the truth. The state reports for the Review Meeting clearly filter out issues that the government does not want to present.

 

Professor Manfred Nowak believes that it is important to know the truth. The NGOs pointed out that the government's covered-up report for the Review Meeting has been exposed one by one, only highlighted the government’s attempt to conceal the truth. The government's aim to portray itself as a human rights defender without facing the issues and the truth is the primary impediment to the advancement of human rights in Taiwan. The punchline, "Human rights are the most beautiful scenery in Taiwan", an ads in the Review Meeting, becomes the biggest irony and the most ridiculous ads.