Wang Lung-chang Case

In 2003, while serving as a professor at the Institute of Civil and Disaster Prevention Engineering of National Taipei University of Technology, Wang Lung-ch'ang was temporarily appointed as one of the 17 evaluation committee members for the Nangang Exhibition Center construction project. He participated in a meeting to evaluate bidders for the construction of the Nangang Exhibition Center, and in 2004, the evaluation committee ultimately resolved that Ruentex Construction Co., Ltd. would be awarded the contract.

In 2008, the Special Investigation Division investigated and concluded that Ruentex Co., Ltd. had bribed First Lady Wu Shu-chen, enabling Ruentex to obtain the list of evaluation committee members through then-Minister of the Interior Yu Cheng-hsien. Ruentex subsequently bribed Wang Lung-ch'ang and seven other evaluation committee members.

Reviewing the evidence in this case, there were no seized account books, no wiretap transcripts, and no objectively verifiable records of meetings or other contacts. Furthermore, there were no abnormal financial flows in the bank accounts of Wang Lung-ch'ang and his family. The court convicted Wang Lung-ch'ang of accepting bribes for an act not breaching his official duties and sentenced him to 7 years and 8 months in prison, relying solely on the testimony of Huang Wei-an, special assistant to the chairman of Ruentex, whose accounts of the times and locations were repeatedly contradictory and whose statements regarding the remittance amounts varied inconsistently.

However, Wang Lung-ch'ang not only denied accepting bribes, but he had never even met or known Huang Wei-an. Moreover, Huang's testimony was inconsistent and kept changing, including how he came to know Wang Lung-ch'ang, as well as the dates and locations of the alleged bribery, which kept shifting as he repeatedly required the prosecutors to "remind" him, thereby altering his statements along with the prosecutors' prompts.

To this day, Professor Wang Lung-ch'ang continues to seek exoneration.

Doubts Regarding the Case

Doubt 1 Wang Lung-ch'ang Never Met Nor Knew Huang Wei-an

Huang Wei-an claimed that he had taken Wang Lung-ch'ang's course in 2003, and had seen Professor Wang Lung-ch'ang between 2001 and 2003 at seminars organized by the Taiwan Professional Civil Engineers Association, as well as in classes of credit programs jointly organized by National Taipei University of Technology and the Association. However, Huang Wei-an's information did not appear on any enrollment or attendee lists for the courses, seminars, or credit programs taught by Wang Lung-ch'ang.

Doubt 2 Huang Wei-an's Testimony Was Vague and Inconsistent

1. Huang Wei-an emphasized that every meeting with Wang Lung-ch'ang took place on weekdays and never on holidays, yet the court concluded that the bribe was delivered on a holiday, which is completely unreasonable.

2. There were a total of four versions of the locations where Huang Wei-an allegedly paid the bribes:
   • Version A: The first meeting took place at a coffee shop on Jinan Road (Dante Coffee).
   • Version B: After prosecutors presented a receipt from Cui-Lin Restaurant dated November 4, 2003, he changed his statement to claim that the first meeting took place at Cui-Lin where the upfront payment was given, while the subsequent payment was made at Dante Coffee near the school.
   • Version C: After prosecutors presented a transportation expense record from Cui-Lin dated February 5, 2004, he changed his statement to claim that the upfront payment was made at Dante and the subsequent payment at Cui-Lin.
   • Version D: The first meeting at Cui-Lin involved only picking up materials, with no delivery of bribe money.
   • Court's Version: The upfront payment of 700,000 NTD was delivered at Dante on a certain day between January 19, 2004, and January 29, 2004; the subsequent payment of 500,000 NTD was delivered at Cui-Lin Restaurant on a certain day in February 2004.

3. Huang Wei-an claimed that he met with Wang Lung-ch'ang twice at Cui-Lin. After prosecutors presented a Cui-Lin receipt dated January 18, 2004, he changed his statement to claim that they met three times at Cui-Lin. However, the court judgment determined that they visited Cui-Lin at least five times.

4. For some of the visits to Cui-Lin and Dante, there were no consumption receipts. Huang Wei-an initially claimed he could not remember, later changed his claim to state that Wang Lung-ch'ang paid or the receipts were lost, and finally claimed in court that he paid in cash himself.

5. Furthermore, witness Ku Pi-ling testified that Huang Wei-an always took taxis when going out on weekdays, yet Huang was unable to produce a single taxi receipt.

6. Huang Wei-an claimed that on January 18, 2004, he commissioned Wang Lung-ch'ang to revise the bidding proposal. However, Ruentex Co., Ltd. was supposed to have completed its bidding no later than January 15, making Huang's testimony clearly inconsistent with objective facts.

Doubt 3 Prosecutors Failed to Decrypt Huang Wei-an's Mobile Phone and Restore PDA Data

The prosecutors seized Huang Wei-an's mobile phone and PDA (personal digital assistant, the predecessor to smartphones), but Huang told prosecutors that he had forgotten the phone's password and had deleted all data on the PDA. At that time, the prosecutors neither retrieved the phone's call logs nor recovered the deleted data on the PDA, and the court failed to investigate the matter thoroughly.

Consequently, the Control Yuan issued a correction regarding this and requested the Ministry of Justice to recover the deleted data on the PDA to clarify the communication methods between Huang Wei-an and Wang Lung-ch'ang. However, the Ministry of Justice replied stating that it was unnecessary.

Doubt 4 Wang Lung-ch'ang Had No Travel Plans Abroad

Huang Wei-an claimed that during a phone call prior to their meeting at Dante between January 19, 2004, and January 29, 2004, he learned that Wang Lung-ch'ang was going to travel to Japan during the winter break and would be unable to attend the evaluation meeting. Consequently, Huang gave Wang an additional 200,000 NTD in upfront payment on top of the original 500,000 NTD in cash, while the subsequent payment was delivered directly in 500,000 NTD in cash.

In reality, Wang Lung-ch'ang had already agreed to serve as an evaluation committee member and could not possibly have planned a trip abroad. Furthermore, he needed to guide graduate students during the winter break and had no travel plans abroad; it was his wife and son who traveled abroad.

Doubt 5 Wang Lung-ch'ang's Score Variance Among Bidders Was the Smallest

There were three bidders competing for the Nangang Exhibition Center construction project. Wang Lung-ch'ang gave Ruentex the highest score simply because Ruentex's presentation performed the best, and the difference in Wang's scores across all three bidders was only 1 point. His score variance was the smallest among all evaluation committee members, making it impossible to guarantee that Ruentex would win the bid. Conversely, committee members whose score variances reached over a dozen points were not investigated.

Doubt 6 Chou Chia-p'eng, In a Similar Case, Was Acquitted

Chou Chia-p'eng was also an evaluation committee member. Ruentex General Manager Tsai Shang-ch'ing claimed that he was responsible for bribing Chou Chia-p'eng, but Tsai Shang-ch'ing's testimony was inconsistent and vague, the prosecutors found no records of fund flows, and the restaurant receipts could not prove a direct connection to bribery. Consequently, the court acquitted Chou Chia-p'eng.

However, in Wang Lung-ch'ang's case, Huang Wei-an's testimony was similarly inconsistent and vague, and the restaurant receipts and travel expenses likewise failed to prove a direct connection to bribery, yet the court convicted Wang Lung-ch'ang. Based on identical evidence, Chou Chia-p'eng was acquitted while Wang Lung-ch'ang was convicted, which inevitably raises suspicions.

Chronology