Gaga For Gag Orders

More calls from Taiwan's China Post to restrict former president Chen Shui-bian's freedom of speech prior to his corruption trial:

At a time when Chen, his family members and other key witnesses are being constantly called in for questioning by prosecutors, the former president is making regular visits to strongholds of support in southern Taiwan.

... Chen has made a victory tour of his hometown, Kuantien in Tainan County, where he received a hero's welcome amid throngs of staunch supporters.

[...]

As we have said before, the former president is merely attempting to move his current dilemma out of the realm of law and into the realm of politics. By mobilizing supporters and waging a counter-attack against purported enemies determined to undermine Taiwan, Chen believes he can take the initiative away from prosecutors and intimidate judges into handing him a light sentence or even an acquittal. While other disgraced politicians of all political stripes have attempted to claim persecution in order to influence the outcome of their trials before, the antics of former President Chen are unprecedented in this country.

If Chen continues persuading more people in southern Taiwan that he is somehow the victim of a campaign of political repression, then he may very well intimidate judges, who might fear domestic turmoil if a long prison sentence is handed down against Chen and his family. At this stage, prosecutors should seek a court order barring the former president from speaking in public about the investigations going on against him.  [emphasis added throughout]

This is rather an elastic definition of the word, "intimidate".  Note that Chen isn't threatening judges, prosecutors, or their families -- he's telling his side of the story (or, giving his spin on the story, if you like) to his supporters.  No, the intimidation part comes in because Chen's supporters MIGHT behave violently if he's found guilty.

If that's the sort of intimidation that merits a gag order, then the Post should have advocated similar legal restraints against KMT heavyweights Lien Chan and Ma Ying-jeou.  Readers may remember that in the aftermath of the 2004 Taiwanese presidential election, Lien and his vice-presidential running mate tried to get the courts to annul the election results, while at the same time encouraging angry mobs to apply political pressure in the streets.  A few years later, Ma behaved more responsibly than Lien (he didn't appear before crowds that had used violence, for example) --- yet he too was not above telling his supporters his opinions regarding HIS corruption trials in 2007.

At no time during either of these two cases do I recall ANYONE proposing that Lien's or Ma's right of free speech be restricted pending the result of their court cases.  There was condemnation of Lien, yes.  And in Ma's case, I don't recall anyone even did that regarding his "intimidation" of the judiciary -- because it seemed perfectly natural that a politician facing a corruption trial should have the right to explain himself before the public.  But again, there were no demands that anyone be forcibly silenced.

What I suspect here is that the pro-KMT press in Taiwan wants to convict Chen on the pages of their newspapers, while simultaneously denying Chen any voice whatsoever in the court of public opinion.  What I'm not certain about however, is the wisdom of this tactic.

At a first glance, a restraining order against Chen would seem to be incredibly counter-productive.  Let's say a judge muzzles Chen tomorrow.  Result?  Instant sympathy for Chen.  Supporters will ask themselves, "Is it not the natural right of any man to proclaim his innocence?"  They'll view the order as an injustice in itself.

But beyond that, I think there's a good chance that Chen would violate the order.  So he goes on a radio talk show.  Says the KMT party-state is persecuting him.  NOW what's the judge gonna do?  Throw him into an oubliette on Green Island until the trial starts?

Oh yeah, THAT'S gonna calm people down, alright.

However, it could be that I'm not Machavellian enough in my thinking on this.  Perhaps the Post is fully aware that a restraining order against Chen would create sympathy for him, and just doesn't care.  So a few hundred die-hards kick up a ruckess over a prejudicial ruling against Chen.  What does that matter?  Chen will be convicted, regardless.  Violence on his behalf will only serve to turn public opinion against him, as it did in the Lien case.  And what could be better than a few broken windows to distract the electorate from the KMT's list of broken economic promises or their gradual surrender of Taiwanese sovereignty?