Are Men's Promises on Valentine's Day Unreliable?

It all goes back to Valentine's Day, February 14 this year. That day I had the honor of serving as the first questioner at the 2004 presidential election televised debate, responsible for asking the two candidates, Mr. Chen Shui-bian and Mr. Lien Chan, about judicial reform. I recall that when I questioned why KMT and PFP legislators had deliberately boycotted amendments to the Judicial Yuan Organization Act for more than a year, Mr. Lien said: "In 1999, when we (the KMT) were in government, we convened the National Conference on Judicial Reform, and I (Lien was then Vice President) presented the direction of reform on behalf of the government. That direction has not changed to this day," and "Although the Judicial Yuan Organization Act involves many personnel matters and other related laws... I want to stress here that we (the KMT and PFP) are not only not boycotting it, we hope to push the bill through smoothly in the fifth session, that is, to complete the legislation this session."

Hearing Mr. Lien personally promise to complete the amendment of the Judicial Yuan Organization Act in this legislative session, I was truly delighted at the time, because civil society had long been impatient and worried that the Legislative Yuan, absorbed in political wrangling, kept failing to pass the amendment. In fact, as long as the Judicial Yuan Organization Act, the locomotive among the judicial reform bills, remains unamended, the Judicial Yuan's role cannot return to its proper constitutional track, and the reorganization and improved efficiency of the judiciary cannot be achieved. For a judiciary in need of sweeping reform, the amendment is truly urgent.

To push the amendment further, I and other friends from the "Alliance for the Three Judicial Reform Acts" specially visited Mr. Lien before the election (on March 2), hoping the KMT-PFP alliance would redouble its efforts and pass this flagship judicial reform bill in one push before March 20. I recall that Mr. Lien clearly stated that day: "We hope the amendment of the Judicial Yuan Organization Act happens 'the sooner the better'! Even if passing it before the presidential election is difficult, I will certainly press the KMT caucus to pass the amendment this session in accordance with the conclusions of the National Conference on Judicial Reform."

Yet while Mr. Lien's promise, made before a national audience and civil society judicial reform groups, still rings in our ears, the KMT and PFP negotiators responded by refusing to attend last Tuesday's negotiation meeting on the amendment convened by Legislator Kao Yu-jen. With the Legislative Yuan's fifth session ending on June 11, one cannot help worrying that KMT and PFP legislators no longer care about the public's earnest hopes for judicial reform.

Of course, the ruling party bears undeniable responsibility for advancing policies and bills. But Mr. Lien's promise was not conditioned on being in government or opposition, on winning or losing. How has it come to this, with fewer than ten days left in the fifth session and the amendment of the Judicial Yuan Organization Act still nowhere in sight? Can politicians' integrity really not withstand scrutiny? Has the KMT's consolidation of its leadership left it unable to reach even its own caucus negotiators? Or are the KMT and PFP, confident that together they are "invincible," unconcerned about being blamed for obstructing judicial reform?

A few months ago, when some suggested Mr. Lien's promise might be an empty check, I replied with full confidence: "On February 14, in front of a national audience, Mr. Lien promised me that the amendment would pass this session." A male friend half-jokingly teased me: "Oh, don't be naive! How can you believe a man's promise on Valentine's Day?" I was speechless then, and now I want to ask even more: "Mr. Lien, is it true?"

* Published in the China Times.