By Chang Kuo-tsai 張國財
The Taipei District Court, which is handling the Core Pacific City corruption case, held its first hearing for former Taipei mayor Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) on Thursday. Ko said of Core Pacific Group chairman Sheen Ching-jing (沈慶京): “If Sheen and his group go down, how many people will be out of work?”
Ko seems to be implying that the judiciary should not care whether Sheen committed a crime, nor should it investigate whether he had accomplices — instead, it should focus on more important matters, such as “how many people will be out of work” if Sheen and his group are found guilty.
It seems that the judiciary should also ignore manufacturers that sell gutter oil scraped from the factory floor. After all, should it not consider how many people would lose their jobs if such unethical businesses were forced to shut down? Should the judiciary also disregard the harms caused by criminal gangs and scammer groups, and instead worry about how many people would be left unemployed if those collapsed? Is Ko’s moral compass really so absurd?
Ko also said: “When Sheen came to the mayor’s office, he only discussed his girlfriend.” Wow. Is Ko saying that, during his tenure as Taipei mayor, his office became a hub for gossiping about personal love affairs?
Ko once praised former Taipei deputy mayor Pong Cheng-sheng (彭振聲), saying he is a talent who was recruited through an open selection process. “He demolished the Zhongxiao Bridge (忠孝橋) overpass in just 87 hours, and built 12,000 social housing units. His skills are evident,” he said. Even if that were true, what does it prove? Does he mean capable people never commit corrupt acts or abuse their power? More often than not, those who are involved in corruption or misconduct are quite capable.
Furthermore, official data showed that at the end of August 2023, there were 27,781 social housing units in Taiwan, with only 23.51 percent planned and completed during Ko’s mayoral term — that amounts to about 6,531 units. Where did Ko get 12,000 from? Did he combine completed units, planned units, projects that have begun land preparation and those under construction, but not yet completed?
Ko also said he found it unbelievable that Pong and former Taipei Urban Planning Commission executive secretary Shao Hsiu-pei (邵琇珮) pleaded guilty. Many defendants plead guilty in exchange for a lighter sentence or probation — a common and reasonable practice in the legal world. What is so “unbelievable” about it? The case is bright and clear — the eyewitnesses, facts and physical evidence have been laid out neatly before us, yet a strong legal case is somehow being twisted into a political witch hunt. Ko dared to commit the act, but now lacks the courage to take responsibility for it. Is this not what the public should call “unbelievable”?
“Several people below myself had already stamped the documents, so why wouldn’t I stamp them?” Ko said. It turns out that his method of governing was simply to act as a rubber stamp all along. If that is the case, Ko, why elect you as mayor?
“City councilors pressure the city government, and department heads handle it. If they cannot handle it, they would report it at the morning meeting,” Ko said.
If city councilors pressure the city government, should the department heads not “handle it” in accordance with the law? What does Ko even mean by “cannot handle it?” Taking a step back, if they “cannot handle it” and report it at the morning meeting, is the matter not over? What more is there to it?
If a department head “cannot handle” their responsibilities and Ko does not replace them, where is the so-called “rationality, pragmatism and science” in that?
Chang Kuo-tsai is a retired National Hsinchu University of Education associate professor.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
