Shut Highway for Butterfly

Track the Secret of Death and Hope
(Picture From United Daily News/2007.03.30)

Shut Highway for Butterfly
After the last cold current bugle in every spring, Butterfly-March begins to depart from south to north inhabitant, where they breed and die in summer bright sunshine--death and hope occur in moment.

The National Freeway Bureau shut highway for purple milkweed butterflies to cross about two hours yesterday to test the function of the whole program. In scientist's initial observation, when The Bureau shut outlane, there are about 70% of butterflies would fly higher to cross highway, but 30% of butterflies could not make it and hit by passing car at inlane.

When the number of butterflies arrive 2000 in one minute, a lane in a major Taiwanese highway will be closed, protective nets and ultra-violet lights will be used to provide a safer journey for over a million migrating purple milkweed butterflies. Yesterday the number of butterflies already arrive 300 in one minute.

The owner of Butterfly-Farm [ Translate this page ] said that the efforts that government made worth applause, but setting the light to change the flying route might need to reconsider. Because butterfly needs to absorb sufficient sunshine energy to flutter its wings, there is no sufficient solar energy for this at night, so butterfly rests at night. Then, why using light at night?

Check Part 1 :Taiwan Shuts Highway for Butterflies to Cross

Published By Wan-Li Yang

March 30th, 2007

Taiwan Shuts Highway for Purple Milkweed Butterflies to Cross

Shut Highway for Butterfly
A lane in a major Taiwanese highway will be closed, protective nets and ultra-violet lights will be used to provide a safer journey for over a million migrating purple milkweed butterflies. ( From BBC News) (picture from Liberty News)

The butterflies winter in the south Taiwan and travel over 600m of motorway to get back to northern, where they lay eggs and die. The young butterflies then spread to whole country but able to fly simultaneously to south every November. Without the carrying on of 2 generation, the route of migration cannot be completed.

(picture shows flying route/from 1-apple.com.tw)

To protect the millions of migrating butterflies, a 600-yard stretch of highway in southern Taiwan will be sealed off in the coming days as the migration peaks, said Lee Tai-ming, head of the National Freeway Bureau. [ Translate this page ] Authorities will set up nets to make the butterflies fly higher and avoid traffic, Lee said. They will also install ultraviolet lights to guide the insects across a highway overpass.

(the following picture from 1-apple.com.tw and the National Freeway Bureau)

Paradize Lost (The Conflict Between Trade and Envirnment)
There was a time during the 1960's when thousands of workers here were producing butterfly art and crafts.　It is estimated that some 10 million butterflies were caught every year.　Even though the export of butterfly products has long since stopped, the butterfly population continues to drop.　The loss of habitat is thought to be the main cause of this decline. In fact many rare and precious species of butterfly are now facing extinction.( from Butterflies of Taiwan.)

Crusade Begin
Taiwan government encouraged NGOs to conduct the research of butterfly life cycle and flying routes. From marking butterflies to identify migratory butterflies, precise flying routes and altitudes remain a mystery, but researchers are able to learn some rough idea about the butterfly path by those markers. This action attracted wide spread attendtion. More and more non-profit groups and I-Shou university join the research of mystery butterfly ,and find out each year thousands of butterflies die when turbulence generated by fast-moving cars drags them into the traffic or under the wheels of oncoming vehicles in typical area.(You can see the 2005 butterfly migration picture by Liberty News:news:http://www.libertytimes.com.tw/2007/new/mar/24/today-life8.htm)

Other information and more butterfly picture

The main NGO: The Butterfly Conservation Society of Taiwan台灣蝴蝶保育學會（02）28814006或上紫蝶全球資訊網http://www.butterfly.org.tw/euploea/recruit.html - [ Translate this page ]
http://www.butterfly.org.tw/home.php [ Translate this page ]

This undated photo made available 24 March 2007 by the Butterfly Conservation Society of Taiwan shows a large drove of butterflies flying above the sky in Maulin Kaohsiung county .
http://www.mediafaxfoto.ro/photo_preview.php?photoId=2295290

The photo shows researchers trying to mark butterflies to figure out their migration route, butterfly path.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lionyang/sets/72157594476200628/

Secret garden:http://hkls.org/siulangshui/aggregation.html

Wan-Li Yang
2007.03.27

檢察獨立與檢察一體-從美國司法部開除八位聯邦檢察官ㄧ案看行政與立法之爭

檢察獨立與檢察一體
-從美國司法部開除八位聯邦檢察官一案看行政權與立法權之爭



DOJ指司法部(類似台灣的法務部)
Attorney General( 台灣的部長兼總長)
US Attorney(聯邦檢察官，類似台灣的檢察長)
Assistance US Attorney( 助理聯邦檢察官，類似台灣的檢察官)

<起因>
美國聯邦檢察系統在全國有95個聯邦司法轄區，每區設一名聯邦檢察官。聯邦檢察官由總統提名，需經參議院批准，任期4年。而在實際操作過程中，這類任免經常由司法部(DOJ)和白宮幕僚操作。
911前如果有US Attorney出缺，司法部長(Attorney General )可任命一位臨時聯邦檢察官，服務最多達120天，在此期間，政府向參議院提出一名正式任命的人選，如果該提名人不能在120天內獲得參議院認可，則由"聯邦地方法官"任命一名正式聯邦檢察官。
911事件發生後，2006美國國會通透過修正《愛國者法案; US Patrriot Act》，自廢武功讓司法部長可以不經參議院批准直接任命"臨時聯邦檢察官"，而只要總統不提出正式人選，臨時聯邦檢察官就可以無限期當下去。(美國國會在911後自廢武功之事，也不止這ㄧ起了)。

Bush與DOJ在 2005一口氣解職了八位US Attorney(類似台灣的檢察長)的工作，而且國會又通過愛國者法案，授權DOJ部長可以不經過參議院同意任命新的US Attorney(聯邦檢察官，類似台灣的檢察長)，於是導致了日後BUSH利用此機會將US Attorney當成政治控制工具的疑慮，此事在2006年民主黨在議員大勝主導The House後，結合媒體的操作下將此議題重新送回政治舞台，尤其本月(三月)初，國會在民主黨議員的推動下介入此事，在國會要求下，司法部上周公佈了關於這一事件的一些內部通信記錄，包括司法部官員和白宮官員之間的有關電子郵件，記錄顯示，司法部長辦公室前主任新普森曾製作一份表格，給每個聯邦檢察官打分，評分標準包括對布希政府的政治忠誠度和工作表現，新普森建議司法部長岡薩雷斯(Attorney General Alberto Gonzales )保留那些“忠誠可靠”的檢察官，而開除那些與政府立場不一的檢察官。
事情爆發後，司法部雖然馬上當機立斷將新普森給開除，但是仍無法止血挽救這場政治風暴，因此，3月下旬部分共和黨議員看到這種局面與輿論壓力，深知苗頭不隊，也就迅速在此議題上向民主黨靠攏，2007.3.15數位議員集體要求美國司法部長岡薩雷斯(Alberto Gonzales)下台爲此事負責，同時也著手在2007.3.20通過法案，重新表示任命新的檢察長，仍必須經過立法同意( 算是"回收權力"吧 )。

<爭議點:布希有無濫用行政權力>
今天(2007.3.22) 參議院司法委員會(Senate Judiciary Committee)授權給主席Patrick Leahy傳喚白宮高級官員的權利(Subpoena Power;有翻譯為質詢權、調查權)，其中還不排除包括傳喚白宮重要的政治顧問karl Rove(凱利;有"布希的大腦"之稱)。
先前白宮表示願意讓其官員在不用宣誓、沒有筆錄的情形下到參議院作證，但是這種提議遭Patrick Leahy拒絕。因此，目前Committee主要是要調查DOJ的政策，是否有政治不當影響DOJ應有的法律決定情形。
其中八位革職的檢察官中據信有些到國會作證表示:其相信拒絕涉有政治動機的起訴是導致其等遭解職的原因。但是DOJ否認有此等事情。

<焦點人物>
在8位US Attorney中被革職的，包括了 2002年由BUSH任命的加州聯邦檢察官、 47歲華裔Carol Lam(中文譯為:林劍華)。民主黨議員質疑，Carol Lam被革職的真正原因，是她在2005年以受賄罪名起訴共和黨籍的加州眾議員Randy "Duke" Cunningham(坎寧漢)。因為Carol Lam(林劍華)擔任聖地牙哥聯邦檢察官(相當於台灣檢察長)後，將該市檢察部門的工作重點，由非法移民和販毒案，改為白領犯罪，並曾因指控一間涉嫌向醫生送回佣以換取好處的醫療保健公司，轟動一時。然而其領導的檢察部門工作目標，卻似乎跟美國司法部(DOJ)相左，司法部高層一通電郵中揚言「她忽視國家的優次和地方的需要」、非法移民案件「數量太少」。在Carol Lam(林劍華)起訴共和黨籍的眾議員Randy Cunningham後，把調查擴及Cunningham的友人，2006年5月向司法部申請兩份搜索狀後，美國司法部(DOJ)高級官員新普森馬上就在次日發電郵給白宮副法律顧問凱利，表示「我們在Carol Lam(林劍華)身上碰到真正的麻煩… 應在11月18 日她四年任期屆滿時準備提名別的人」，Carol Lam就在 2006年12月接到革職通知。

除了Carol Lam事件外，另一件布希遭人詬病的事件，是據NPR專訪其中一位被革職的聯邦檢察官，該前聯邦檢察官證實，在其辦理選舉詐欺案件的調查時，有共和黨議員以電話連絡州聯邦檢察官，關心案件調查情形(因為，共和黨懷疑存在計票不當行為，例如一些判刑的罪犯和不合格的選民也參加了投票，使民主黨受益)，但因該名前聯邦檢察官並未在電話中做出承諾，事後卻遭革職。為此，媒體與民主黨議員即懷疑共和黨議員向布希政府抱怨聯邦檢察官，導致了該名檢察官的被解職。這ㄧ連串的懷疑，事後布希也承認，他受到了黨內議員的壓力。

另外今天(2007.3.22)ㄧ位前在DOJ的民權部門(Civil Right Division)工作的官員也在這次NPR2007.3.22電台的專訪中表示，政治確實會影響個案的法律決定。一位在Civil Right Division工作的政府律師(有翻譯為檢察官)尤班克斯，舉出稍早她在一起訴菸草商案件中，政策確實影響最後的"求償建議"的例子。起因於尤班克斯花了五年時間調查消費者控告菸草廠商ㄧ案，許多消費者控告菸草廠商的廣告誤導消費者，特別是在有關所謂「淡菸」方面的誤導，法院審理本案的時間長達八個月，但是就在2005.06本案展開言詞辯論前夕，司法部幾位官員命令尤班克斯將本案的罰金，從1300億美元減少到100億美元，同時命令她在法庭中宣讀一份他們準備好的結辯聲明，她當時表示這根本沒有任何依據，於是她向長官表示你用寫的，我就造你寫的向法官宣讀，2005她就遞出辭呈。

<行政、立法部門的權力之爭> 各方立場

立法: 司法委員會(Commitee也)希望要慎用傳喚的權力( Subpeoenas Power)，不過也表示只有運用Subpeoenas power才可以知道事情最後的真相。

行政1: 白宮表示願意讓白宮官員到國會中進行說明，但表示不能宣誓以及製做紀錄。布希認為這ㄧ事件是民主黨在借題發揮，以行使國會調查權力為名，削弱行政部門權力。 (個人認為:這是BUSH政府看到之前整肅前民主黨總統柯林頓時，自己所運用的手段，引為前車之鑑，所以堅決不讓自己的官員宣誓作證)。

行政2: 而美國司法部(DOJ)則表示開除這些聯邦檢察官(類似台灣的檢察長)是因為這些US Attorney根本不聽從DOJ的政策決定，例如遵守DOJ的移民、恐怖份子政策等，沒有政治忠誠(Loyal Bushies)，表現不佳(Poor Performance)。所以，認為開除這些聯邦檢察官具有正當性。
(因為，美國聯邦檢察官(檢察長)乃隨政黨輪替上下台的，所以ㄧ旦新政黨上臺，總統就會提名總長、聯邦檢察官，再經過參議院同意，歷史上僅發生過一次ㄧ位聯邦檢察官拒絕下台的事件 ; 因此，美國這樣的體系下，講究的是"檢察ㄧ體"，甚至是司法部這起事件的內部email用語都是"政治忠誠度( loyal)"，這是台灣德日司法體系基礎下長期強調、講究"檢察獨立"所難以想像的。)。

<如果官員不作證呢?>
眾議員( Rep. Linda Sanchez)是小組委員會(The subcommittee)主席，她表示:我們非常擔心這樣的淨化(指布希開除聯邦檢察官的"淨化"行為)，單純的讓聯邦檢察官變成政治控制的工具，而非用來管理司法、尋求正義，讓正義可以平等得服務公眾。 "We are greatly concerned that this purge was intended to allow prosecutors to be used as simply one more instrument of political control, instead of to administer justice equal to all."

但是，被問到:如果白宮官員不到Captial Hill 作證又能如何呢? 眾議員Linda表示:這至少顯示了白宮的不當動機(不當解除US Attorney的動機)，這使公眾懷疑白宮政策。

<台灣人的解讀>
看到Linda這樣的解讀，如果此事在台灣，公眾的反應必是ㄧ陣錯愕，問號連連。
兩方不是應該一定不善罷甘休，傳喚不到行政官員，就刪部門預算啊 ! 這是我看這件事情時，的第一刻反應。否則玩了這們久，豈可這樣草草了之?
但是，看看發言人Linda的用語"公眾懷疑白宮政策"，仔細想想，這就不就是爲2008年的總統選舉先預設幾枚炸彈?換言之，大家不信任共和黨啦，民主黨又多了可以操盤的籌碼。

<看看美國政治史 學者觀點>
George Mason University Professor Mark Rozell, author of the book Executive Privilege. (行政官豁免權)作者表示:這有點像是行政權力與立法權力之爭，但是如果不能解決，就必須求之訴訟解決，但是反觀美國幾百年來的政治操作歷史，在提出訴訟(file lawsuit)之前，政客嗎 ! 兩邊就會找出互相讓步、挽救各自面子的辦法了。

大家吵到一定的程度，就適可而止，找出互相讓步的方式。
這實在很難以解讀，個人來試作比方吧。比如，這是第一次爲解職聯邦檢察官開司法委員會，並授權委員會主席可以運用Subpoena Power("傳喚權力")傳喚白宮官員。反之，行政部門也受到若干教訓，下次絕對不敢明目張膽的再一口氣解職八個聯邦檢察官了。
但是，記得~~~這不代表政治運作不會地下化。


Time table:(此部分資料來自NPR之整理)

February 2005:
白宮律師(White House Counsel) Harriet Miers 向司法部長 的首席官員Kyle
Sampson建議解雇 93 位U.S. attorneys.

March 2, 2005:
Sampson 發e-mails 給白宮律師Miers,將U.S. attorneys 分成三類，第一類是有產出的(produced), 管制佳的(managed well),以及顯示出有政治忠誠度的( exhibited loyalty to the President and Attorney General).

Jan. 9, 2006:
Sampson 發e-mails給 Miers建議僅解僱ㄧ部分的聯邦檢察官(a limited number).
March 9, 2006:
布希簽署the USA PATRIOT Act 修正案，其中一條就是授權部長(Attorney General)任命不必經過參議院同意而任命新就任的聯邦檢察官。

May 11, 2006:
Sampson發 e-mails給白宮官員( White House official) William Kelley,討論解雇聖地牙哥檢察官[San Diego U.S. Attorney] Carol Lam(林劍華)ㄧ事。當時Lam正在調查共和黨議員Randy 與共和黨congressman , Jerry Lewis貪污案.

June 2006:
司法部解雇H.E.,換上白宮官員Karl Rove的助理 J. Timothy Griffin。

Sept. 13, 2006:
Sampson發e-mail給Miers警告行政部門要注意Congress就新任職的U.S. attorneys態度，建議，如果站在行政部門的角度，利用新法授權部長(總長)ㄧ法，達到效率、減少政治因素介入白宮政策的影響。

Fall 2006:
Bush與DOJ部長會面， 表達對U.S. attorneys表現的不滿，但表示沒有提供具體姓名給部長( without naming specific prosecutors)。

October 2006:
參議員Sen. Pete Domenici 與眾議員 Rep. Heather Wilson 打電話給U.S. Attorney David Iglesias 詢問新墨西哥民主黨貪污調查 ㄧ事。隨後司法部就將US Attorney David Iglesias 列入解僱名單。

Nov. 15, 2006:
Sampson 發e-mails給 Miers表示:就解雇檢察官ㄧ事我們必須立場一致以抵禦可能發生的政治反彈( "I am concerned that to execute this plan [firing seven U.S. attorneys simultaneously] properly we must all be on the same page and be steeled to withstand any political upheaval that might result. If we start caving to complaining U.S. attorneys or Senators then we shouldn't do it — it'll be more trouble than it's worth.")

Dec. 2, 2006:
Sampson 發e-mails給司法部官員 Michael Elston表示還在等待適當時機(still waiting for green light from White House [to fire U.S. attorneys].)

Dec. 7, 2006:
DOJ同日解僱了七位 U.S. attorneys，這七位的名稱如下: Daniel Bogden of Nevada, Paul Charlton of Arizona, Margaret Chiara of Michigan, David Iglesias of New Mexico, Carol Lam of San Diego, John Mckay of Seattle, and Kevin Ryan of San Francisco.

Jan. 12, 2007:
3位參議員提出法案要求回收權力(Senate authority to oversee U.S. attorney appointments.)

Jan. 18, 2007:
部長( Alberto Gonzales)到 參議院司法委員會作證表示:我從未因為政治因素去變動US Attorney的職務。 (Hear Gonzales' testimony.From NPR)

Feb. 7, 2007:
副部長(Deputy Attorney General) Paul McNulty 到參議院的司法委員會作證表示: 毎一個個案，只要是United States attorney職位出缺時,行政部門會忠實的提出人選並經由參議院同意( confirmed by the Senate) (Hear NcNulty testify.From NPR)

March 6, 2007:
前聯邦檢察官到國會作證，部分表示相信自己是因為政治因素遭革職。

March 12, 2007:
Sampson承認沒有將DOJ與白宮通信過程據實告知DOJ部門。遞辭呈。

March 13, 2007:
DOJ將 相關文件送到國會( Capitol Hill) ，部長當天取消出行計畫並舉行記者會表示不會辭職，雖然錯誤已經犯下(Mistakes were made) (Hear Gonzales apologize.From NPR.)

March 14, 2007:
布希(President Bush)人還在墨西哥訪問，也就此舉行記者會表示:自己確實有與部長通話，這件事情的處理確實較為粗造。


檢察獨立與檢查一體
-從美國司法部開除八位聯邦檢察官ㄧ案看行政與立法之爭

楊婉莉
Wan-Li Yang
03.23.2007

Why American-style Criminal Justice?

Part 2 comparative criminal justice
check Part 1: Comparative Criminal Procedure
Why Drive Toward American-Style Criminal Justice System?

The reception of American law spreads abroad from Israel to Japan to Latin America. This trend is obvious. Taiwan aimed at reconstructing criminal procedure along adversarial lines, but why?

1.Taiwan history?
When Japan colonized Taiwan (1895-1945), it imposed many of its own institutions and procedures of criminal justice. As a result, the two systems of criminal justice closely resemble each other, just like their counterpart, South Korea. After World War II, Japan, a German-based Continental system, introduced American-Style adversary system. Furthermore, Japanese New jury law was enacted in 2004 and is going to come into effect by May 2009. Could this porvide some clues?

2.The support from legal professionals and the public opinion?
BRIAN L. KENNEDY, an American attorney living in Taiwan, in his journal article, Taiwan's Criminal-Justice System: Clash of Cultures
, suggested that this sort of movement based on the agreement from legal professionals and the public opinion.

"Over the past several years, Taiwan's criminal-justice system has undergone a number of reforms. While most legal professionals and the public agreed legal reform was in order and while the attempts at legal reform were commendable in spirit, many of these reforms are bound for failure because they failed to fit together into a coherent whole and failed to account for cultural factors. However, despite the rocky first round of criminal-justice reforms, there are forces at work within Taiwan's criminal-justice system that will drive more successful subsequent rounds of reform."
Though this journal article describles the differences of the role of prosecutors and judges between Taiwan criminal justice system and American criminal justice system with high precision. I could not share all his view about reform power, but agree that large part of the reform-power comes from the support of legal professionals, especially who had legal training from the U.S.

3. Influence by joining the Cold War camp

Tay-Sheng Wang is now professor of law school in National Taiwan University, and famous for his research in Taiwan legal history. He provided some clues as following:

In the 1950s, the ROC government joined the Cold War camp of the Western democracies led by the United States, and, consistent with this, American legal institutions and ideas were to a certain extent "imported" into Taiwan. (See Tay-Sheng Wang, The Legal Development of Taiwan in the 20th Century: Toward a Liberal and Democratic Country, 11 Pac. Rim L. & Pol’y J. 531.)

4. Worldwide Leadership of American Cultue?
Since the end of the WWII, American cluture in general, and American legal culture in particular, acknowlegedly acquired worldwide leadership.


The prestige of the American legal model has been associated with the strength of the United States' political and economic structure, but also with some characteristics of its legal scholarship. Legal scholarship, being the least inherently parochial of the legal formants, and therefore the most apt to diffuse legal ideas abroad, has been identified as the most important vehicle for the circulation of legal culture, provided that two requirements are met. It needs to be simultaneously metapositivistic and perceived by foreign scholars as leading within its own boarders. Since 1930, these requirements appear to have been met by American legal scholarship. As a consequence of its prestige, American legal scholarship was able to export such general ideas as legal realism or law and economics methodology to understand the law as a phenomenon of social organization.

See Elisabetta Grande, Italian Criminal Justice: Borrowing and Resistance,48 Am. J. Comp. L. 227
The reform process of Taiwan criminal justice system was almost the same with Italian criminal justice reform process, so, could this suggestion sustain and fit in Taiwan's reform motive?

5. overload problem
Taiwan meant to provide its criminal justice with new, efficient procedures to cope with its judicial overlaod problem.


unfinished............
Published By Wan-Li Yang