Aggressive Police Officers Unlocatable Even by Calling the Police: "I Want the Truth of March 24" NGO Joint Press Conference

Following two years of judicial proceedings, the truth behind the "Executive Yuan Violent Eviction Incident" that broke out between March 23 and March 24, 2014, remains unclear. Not only have the officials who ordered the eviction escaped accountability, but even the police officers who assaulted citizens have yet to be identified. On the eve of the incident's second anniversary, the Duty Lawyers Group for Opposition to the Black Box Cross-Strait Service Trade Agreement and multiple civil society organizations held a press conference today (March 10) in front of the Legislative Yuan, strongly calling on the new legislature to proactively exercise its investigative powers to thoroughly clarify the truth of the incident.

Article 14 of the Constitution and Article 21 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights explicitly guarantee people the freedom of peaceful assembly. Furthermore, Articles 6 and 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights require the government to protect the right to life of the people while prohibiting the practice of torture. However, during the "Executive Yuan Violent Eviction Incident," in order to fulfill the order for a "time-limited clearance," the police brazenly resorted to disproportionate enforcement methods, using police equipment to harm crowds peacefully sitting-in, which clearly violated constitutional and covenant norms. Although injured citizens filed private prosecutions with the Taipei District Court and provided video footage of the assaulting police officers in hopes that the judiciary would clarify the attribution of responsibility, the administrative authorities unexpectedly responded to the court's investigation with "no such person can be found," raising suspicions of deliberate concealment.

In addition, following the incident, the Internal Administration Committee of the Legislative Yuan immediately established the "Special Project Investigation Team on the Truth of the Executive Yuan Suppression of the Anti-Service Trade Student Movement" on March 27, 2014, to investigate the origin and cause of the incident. However, relevant agencies such as the Executive Yuan and the National Police Agency of the Ministry of the Interior brazenly refused to provide information under the pretexts of "confidential information," "non-disclosure of investigations," and "no relevant data found." Ultimately, the Internal Administration Committee could only conclude its efforts by freezing a portion of the budget. Ironically, while neither the nation's legislative nor judicial organs could find the police officers who assaulted people, the media continued to expose news that the police had already identified at least four assaulting officers. It is evident that the administrative agencies not only show contempt for the judiciary, but the exercise of the parliament's investigative power has also proven insufficient to oversee the inertia of the executive branch.

In response, Amnesty International specifically pointed out in its global Human Rights Report 2015/16: "No thorough, independent and impartial investigation had been carried out by the end of 2015 into the excessive force used by police on 23 and 24 March 2014 to clear protesters from and around the Executive Yuan, or into the government's overall handling of the 'Sunflower Student Movement'." Conversely, the "National Human Rights Report on the ICCPR and ICESCR" drafted by the executive branch earlier this year failed to mention the "Executive Yuan Violent Eviction Incident" even once.

As an oversight body, the Legislative Yuan should properly utilize its investigative powers to thoroughly uncover the truth of the incident in order to fulfill the oversight and check-and-balance functions conferred by the Constitution. Therefore, the Duty Lawyers Group for Opposition to the Black Box Cross-Strait Service Trade Agreement and civil society organizations hereby call upon:

1. The Legislative Yuan to exercise its investigative power and immediately establish an investigation committee to look into the origin and cause of the "Executive Yuan Violent Eviction Incident."
2. The investigation results to be compiled into a report and submitted to the international review committee for the Second National Reports under the Two Covenants as supplementary comments.

Appendix: Progress List of Private Prosecution Cases

No.	Date of Private Prosecution Filed	Private Prosecutor	Defendant
			Assaulting Police Officer	Huang Sheng-yung (Then-Director-General of the Taipei City Police Department)	Chiang Yi-huah (Then-Premier of the Executive Yuan) Wang Cho-chun (Then-Director-General of the National Police Agency, Ministry of the Interior) Fang Yang-ning (Then-Chief of the Zhongzheng First Police Precinct, Taipei City Police Department)
1	2014/04/01	Elderly Mr. Chou	Private prosecutor did not file charges	The lawyers group attempted to merge this case with the Chou Ni-an case for trial, but it has already been refused by the judge and dismissed by ruling.	Under trial. Elderly Mr. Chou passed away on 2015/03/31. His daughter applied to assume the litigation in accordance with the law, but the court has not yet granted permission for assumption.
2	2014/04/15	Dr. Wang	This case is currently applying for a constitutional interpretation. The court's judgment dismissing this case as unacceptable is already final, and the lawyers group is applying to the Grand Justices for a constitutional interpretation. In addition, the lawyers group attempted to merge this case with the Chou Jung-tsung case and the Chou Ni-an case for trial, but the latter has already been refused by the judge and dismissed by ruling.
3	2014/04/16	Legislator Chou Ni-an	Court dismissed as unacceptable	Under trial by the Taipei District Court.	Court dismissed as unacceptable. The court's judgment dismissing this case as unacceptable is already final. The lawyers group is attempting to apply for this case to be merged into the Chou Jung-tsung case for trial.
4	2014/04/21	Hsiao O-O	Private prosecutor did not file charges	Court dismissed as unacceptable. The lawyers group attempted to merge this case with the Chou Ni-an case for trial, but it has already been refused by the judge and dismissed by ruling.
5	2014/04/25	Lin O-O and 18 others	Under trial
6	2014/05/07	Huang O-O and 22 others
7	2014/06/13	Hsu O-O	Court dismissed as unacceptable
8	2014/06/30	Chou O-O	Under trial
9	2014/09/12	Chiang O-O	Court dismissed as unacceptable
10	2014/09/23	Liao O-O	Private prosecutor did not file charges

List of Speakers

Chou Ni-an / Plaintiff, Former Legislator
Attorney KAO JUNG-CHENG / Convener of the Duty Lawyers Group for Opposition to the Black Box Cross-Strait Service Trade Agreement
Attorney YU PO-HSIANG / Convener of the Duty Lawyers Group for Opposition to the Black Box Cross-Strait Service Trade Agreement
Attorney LAI CHUNG-CHIANG / Convener of the Economic Democracy Union
Associate Professor HUANG HOU-MING / Taiwan Association for Democracy Protection
Lin Fei-fan / Initiator of Saw Tô Chèng-tsèng (Taiwan March)
Sylvia Chi / Secretary General of the Taiwan Association for Human Rights
Associate Professor HSU WEI-CHUN / Alliance for Constitutional Reform

Supporting Organizations

Judicial Reform Foundation
Citizen of the Earth, Taiwan
Taiwan Association for Human Rights
Taiwan Labour Front
Association for Innocence Project Taiwan
Humanist Education Foundation
Green Citizens' Action Alliance
Ta-Tso-Wei-Hsin
Taiwan March
Economic Democracy Union
Covenant Watch
Taiwan Association for Democracy Protection
Alliance for Constitutional Reform
Yung-Soo Legal Foundation
Parliamentary Observatory / Congress Watch
Democratic Front Against Cross-Strait Trade Agreement
Citizen Congress Watch
Amnesty International Taiwan
Black Island Nation Youth Front

Press Contacts

Attorney CHEN YU-FAN / Deputy Executive Director of the Judicial Reform Foundation