由 iChester 回覆 2011-03-18
My goodness!
I was surprised to see a " president-in-2012 "
after clicking the button and seeing her interview.
However, I really suspect if she could.
Who ever saw a " president " being interviewed like that?
Giving a " written " answer?
Touching her " black " hair?
Looking like a movie star?
Frankly, her body language was really terrible.
During to-and-fro conversation between her and journalists,
God damn good she spoke it out about former president Chen
orally and smoothly without seeing the " hidden " paper that
" We must respect the operation of government "
" If A-bian needs to face the judiciary, he has to "
" The judiciary should not be controlled by politics "
Didn't she see A-bian's cases were controlled by Ma?
Why changed the judge in the beginning?
Didn't she read the newspaper with many law professionals
and judges' articles showing the judicial system was wrong
including professor Jerome Cohen who urged Taiwanses
key roles to speak it out and the outstanding article of judge
Hong Ying-Hua at Su-lin District Court?
Was she sometimes blind, often dumb and always deaf to the truth of A-bian's cases?
Tsai YY should be ashamed of studying law and being a Taiwanese.
If we recall her speeches at 517 protest and 518 sit-in,
She is, no doubt, a big " LIAR " like Ma YY.
=========================================================================
違反人性尊嚴的失根司法
自由時報 ◎洪英花
一、國家權力之首要—維護人性尊嚴：人性尊嚴與生俱來，和生命同價。德國基本法第一條明定「人性尊嚴不可侵犯」、「一切國家權力均有尊重及保護人性尊嚴之義務」。
司法院釋字第三七二號：「維護人格尊嚴，為我國憲法保障人民自由權利之基 本理念。」國家必須遵照憲法秩序行使國家高權，以維護人民尊嚴為目的。法律之制訂、公權力之執行，須「把人當目的」，在尊重個人尊嚴自由下實現，不容國家 權力假「人民意志」、「人民目的」為名，遂行國家目的或打擊異己。當人民不再是國家權力之目的，而係受支配之工具，人性尊嚴已然剝奪殆盡。
二、權力本惡—唯賴正當法律程序制衡：德國文化歷史學家Jacob Burckhardt謂「權力本惡」。魔鬼總在細節裡伺機而動，唯賴正當法律程序制衡。美國一七九一年憲法第五增修條文明定：「聯邦非依正當法律程序，不 得剝奪人民之生命、自由及財產。」釋字第三九六、四四二、五一二、五七四號均指出：「人民有依正當法律程序請求公正審判之權利。」個案審判應實踐正當程 序，「法定法官」才有權發動國家刑罰權，「合法正當之裁判」正是「法定法官」所要兌現的司法天平。陳水扁前總統由「無審理權法官」所為之第一審判決，違反 正當法律程序，悖離人性尊嚴，徒具判決形式，無實質正當性，任何人均不受拘束。釋字第六六五號理由書肯認「法定法官」為憲法應遵循之法則，卻認北院更換法 官未違憲，罔顧人權尊嚴，誠如李震山大法官所言「對本件解釋藉由審判獨立原則極大化所採『國權重於人權』之態度，深感不安。」
三、不容切割的根—正當合法的第一審：公平正義所賴絕不止於實體審理結果 之有罪、無罪，應含程序正義之保障。審級利益之目的，在求取審判結果之確當，人民依國家提供的審級制度，循第一、二、三審級別審判，以保障被告訴訟權。惟 審判程序，重在第一審即應落實公正審理，如有不服，再輔以上訴救濟，上訴審係基於第一審構造，修正其誤判或擅斷，審級利益始謂完整。陳水扁前總統（扁以外 並無換法官之問題）係由無審理權法官作成「無效裁判」，如蓋屋，第一審迄無構造物，其上級審法院判決僅如「空中樓閣」或「斷根蘭花」，己身已無地立錐，遑 論捍衛人權尊嚴？
四、「法官法」不可淪為「掃除路障」的工具：全球司法獨立宣言前言「鑒於 司法為自由的一個重要支柱…國家在行使其權限時，應促進人權宣言的崇高目標，維護司法獨立。」邇來諸多案件引發社會質疑，ＢＢＣ中文網報導：「台灣司法如 何判決並無一致的標準與法律見解，往往引起爭議以及政治介入干預的質疑。」司法興革，誠屬萬端，法官養成過於僵化，法院人事調遷、評鑑諸多弊端，法官自 律、司法行政該有之承擔、相關機關及社會之協力均重要。「法官法」已進入立院議程，退場機制最受關注，宜審慎辯證，若淪為「掃除路障」或干預審判之工具， 豈非司法之真正危機
（作者現職士林地方法院法官)
========================================================================
只有笨蛋，才不知道馬統的黑手伸入司法
http://www.taiwanenews.com/doc/20101111101.php
社論：尊重司法豈可兩套標準
http://www.taiwanenews.com/doc/20101107101.php
杜麗萍：特偵組要脅咬陳水扁收賄
This is about how dirty Taiwan's judicial system.
http://www.taiwanenews.com/doc/20100924101.php
馬英九的老師為何「挺扁」？
http://caochangqing.com/big5/newsdisp.php?News_ID=1848
李俊達質疑：民進黨何時在司法人權上挺阿扁？
http://www.taiwanenews.com/doc/20090429103.php
扁案判決自始無效 ◎ 洪英花
http://www.taiwanenews.com/doc/20090912101.php
|
