(圖片來源：Wikimedia Commons，Supercheap Auto store in Wagga Wagga, New South Wales。)
The Legislative Yuan is deliberating on an Examination Yuan-sponsored bill to amend the Public Functionary Service Act, which, if passed, will force top government officials, political appointees in particular, to resign if and when they make some damaging faux pas. At first, almost everybody thought the amendment, known popularly as the “big mouth” clause, would pass in a jiffy. The deliberation hit a snag, however.
There was strong opposition, which John C. Kuan, president of the Examination Yuan, had never expected to come from official quarters. Dr. Shen Lyushun, deputy minister of foreign affairs, told a Legislative Yuan committee meeting that he personally objected to a mandatory resignation of big mouth political appointees just because of their “serious flaws in words and deeds.” He said it's not proper and fitting to punish them just for speaking up for or against what they think is right or wrong.
If so, he added, it is like what Sima Qian or Ssu-Ma Chien wrote in his Historical Records about the mistake Liu Bang, founder of the Han Dynasty (206-23 B.C.), committed by having those people in “tetes-a-tetes” executed. He didn't elaborate, but those people in tetes-a-tetes were speaking ill of the first Han emperor behind his back. “The Republic of China,” Shen said, “isn't a country where people in tetes-a-tetes should have their heads chopped off.” That meant, of course, political appointees shouldn't be fired simply because of some gaffes they make in public. And certainly, ours is a democracy, not a country where the rule of one man prevails.
That makes sense. For one thing, nobody is free from saying something he shouldn't have said. But anybody who says something seriously damaging or even slanderous to others has to be punished, and fortunately, we have libel laws to mete out due punishment accordingly. On the other hand, political appointees who have to quit together with whoever appointed them should be given freedom to speak up rather than keep mum. They shouldn't be sacked for inappropriate or inadvertent remarks they make.
Dr. Kuan was not just nonplussed. Probably a little peeved, he offered two not very apt citations from the Analects of Confucius to rebut Dr. Shen. Confucius, China's greatest sage and founder of its one-time state religion, was cited as saying: “A gentleman wants to be slow in speech but quick in action” and “It is specious language which confuses men's ideas of what is virtue. It is petty impatience which ruins great undertakings.” One thing Dr. Kuan has forgotten is that quotations from the Confucian canon, which is the equivalent to China's Bible for government officials, cannot be cited to prove in a debate that the opponent's assertion is false.
That's illogical, simply because the truth such quotations assert is often negated by other quotations from the same canon. Perhaps, he hasn't read “Sic et Non” by Pierre Abelard. The French heretic juxtaposes contradictory quotations from Church Fathers in his book, published before its time nine centuries ago. Quotations, like wise sayings, just abstract part of the truth. They cannot be generalized. One example suffices. We have “Genius displays even in childhood” and “Great talents mature late.” They are contradictory, but each tells part of the truth.
We also wish to remind Dr. Kuan that Minoru Yanagida resigned as Minister of Justice in Japan only last month to take responsibility for a gaffe. The Japanese cabinet minister was held in contempt of the Diet for commenting in public. When he was interpellated on the floor of the Diet, he avoided speaking up on questions about a specific issue and offered a platitude of “duly dealing with that issue in full accordance with law and on the basis of evidence presented.” He was sacked for keeping silent on what he is duty-bound to speak on. Well, he probably deserved to be fired for speaking part of the truth. Most top government officials in Tokyo and Taipei (and everywhere else but not all of them) are slippery like eels to hold on to their sinecure jobs. The only mistake the Japanese minister made is to give voice to it in public; and unfortunately, his faux pas was reported.
Another reminder to Dr. Kuan — Premier Wu Den-yih is considered gaffe-prone. If the amendment were adopted as is, would he be required to resign? After all, he is a public functionary. And he should be equal before the law.
〈本文僅供參考，不代表本會立場〉
（本文刊載於99.12.22 The China Post 4版 ）
王順民
(
11月22日 15:13
)
劉新圓
(
2007年10月4日 15:04
)
