This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

140401Z Nov 05

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 TAIPEI 004559 
 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPT PASS AIT/WASHINGTON 
DEPT FOR EAP/TC, INR/EAP 
 
FROM AIT KAOHSIUNG BRANCH OFFICE 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PGOV PREL TW
SUBJECT:  Prosecutors make little headway preventing 
vote-buying in 3 in 1 Elections 
 
Ref:  A.  TAIPEI 4235   B.  TAIPEI 4355 
 
SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED.  PLEASE PROTECT ACCORDINGLY. 
 
¶1. (SBU) Summary.  Despite increasing enforcement of 
election laws in Taiwan and the decline of traditional 
forms of vote buying, this practice continues to play a 
role the upcoming 3 in 1 elections (reftels) in southern 
Taiwan.  While the traditional practice appears to be on 
the decline, in part due to aggressive prosecution, the 
real question seems to be not if, but how vote-buying 
buying 
will be practiced in the upcoming election.  New, less 
obvious, forms of vote-buying are widely anticipated, given 
the 2001 decision by prosecutors to limit any transfer of 
bribes or benefits to voters to amounts under NTD 30. 
End summary. 
 
¶2.  (SBU) Vote buying has been a common practice in local 
Southern Taiwan elections for many years according to local 
political analysts, despite laws prohibiting interference 
with the free exercise of voting.  Interference as written 
in the law focuses on the traditional forms of transfer of 
money between the vote-buyer and the vote-seller, with both 
being liable to fines and imprisonment.  The NTD 30 (US 90 
cents), although not written into law, was imposed as a 
result of an island-wide meeting of judges and prosecutors 
in 2001 to strengthen their hand in rooting out activities 
that could be construed as vote-buying. 
 
¶3.  (SBU) In 2002, AIT/K described traditional vote-buying 
scenarios as situations in which local ward chiefs or other 
her 
neighborhood leaders in cities and rural districts make 
arrangements with particular parties or candidates to 
guarantee a certain number of votes for the candidate from 
their district.  The ward chiefs or other neighborhood 
leaders are then provided funds based on the number of 
promised votes.  The ward chief or other coordinator is 
then expected quietly to distribute a set amount of funds 
to each household based on the number of registered voters 
in the household in exchange for a promise to vote for the 
paying candidate.  Candidates or their representatives must 
rely on the payment recipients ethics or loyalty, as 
there is no way to ensure that the voter actually votes or 
does so for the candidate promised.  This traditional form 
is believed to continue to be practiced in more rural areas. 
 
¶4.  (SBU) In 2005, prosecutors find themselves facing 
multiple instances of complaints against so-called vote- 
buyers.  In most instances, law enforcement officials told 
told 
AIT/K, lack of direct evidentiary links will prohibit them 
from prosecuting individuals.   Often prosecutors must rely 
mainly on informants and pursue individual instances rather 
than being able to tackle larger-scale practices. 
Increasingly, the forms of vote-buying are becoming more 
ambiguous and harder to strictly define as vote buying 
according to previous practice or previous legal 
interpretations. 
 
¶5. (SBU) Most recently, Taitung County Education Bureau 
Director Chen Kun-sheng was held incommunicado after an 
interview by Taitung Prosecutors on November 5 for alleged 
vote-buying.  According to prosecutors, Chen hosted dinner 
for fifteen elementary and junior high school principals in 
the name of celebrating the conclusion of the countys 
little league baseball games on Oct. 26.  Prosecutors said 
that Chen requested the principals at the dinner to 
mobilize school faculty to attend the inauguration of 
independent magistrate candidate Liu Chao-haos campaign 
gn 
headquarters scheduled for November 6.  Liu Chao-hao is 
incumbent Taitung County Vice Magistrate. 
 
¶6. (U) After individual interviews with those principals, 
prosecutors issued a subpoena on November 4.  On the same 
day, right after Chen completed his report to the Taitung 
county council, Ministry of Justice Investigation Bureau 
(MJIB) Taitung Station agents escorted Chen to the 
Prosecutors Office.  Chen told prosecutors that the dinner 
was purely to celebrate the success of the baseball series. 
Chen noted that some of the discussions at the party were 
related to the year-end election, but denied any vote- 
buying took place. 
 
¶7. (U) Some principals pointed out that since Vice 
Magistrate Liu is the magisterial candidate, and since Chen 
is a subordinate of the Vice Magistrate, it is natural that 
Chen would solicit their help.  They emphasized that Chen 
did not use his position to entice or coerce them for to 
vote for candidate Liu.  Vice Magistrate and independent 
candidate Liu Chao-hao denied that he has asked Chen to 
help him seek support and stated that he would not do 
anything illegal since he formerly served judge and was 
clear about the the law. 
 
¶8. (SBU) Reftels A and B discuss the most high-profile vote- 
buying case during the 3 in 1 election, which is related to 
Independent Candidate for Pingtung Countys magisterial 
seat, Soong Li-hua.  Soong was arrested despite the fact 
supporters, rather than herself, hosted early pre-election 
events in which raffles were used to distribute large 
prizes such as refrigerators, bicycles and televisions. 
This form of event, widely practiced at year-end private 
company dinners and celebrations throughout Taiwan, was 
deemed by prosecutors as a flagrant attempt at vote-buying 
via surrogates.  Prosecutors began their investigations 
early, even video-taping the seven raffle events.  However, 
when Soongs office was actually raided, no documentary 
evidence was found linking Soong to the purchase or 
r 
distribution of the raffle prizes.  Prosecutors told AIT/K 
they believe someone in MJIB tipped off Soong to the 
investigation and upcoming raid. Without the direct paper 
trail to link Soong or her campaign office to the purchase 
of the items, prosecutors fear this case may never make it 
to trial. 
 
¶9.  (SBU) As of November 10, 2005, in southern Taiwan the 
running tally of vote-buying complaints and informal 
investigations had risen by 70% (see ref A).  Complaints 
and cases emerging from the upcoming 3 in 1 elections 
stand currently as follows: 
 
-- Pingtung police have received 97 complaints.  Of these 
six are under informal investigation by the county police. 
Indictments have been brought in one case against nine 
persons. (Note: Soong Li-huas case is still under legal 
investigation; no indictment has yet been brought in.  End 
note.) 
 
-- Kaohsiung police have received 100 complaints, 90 of 
which are now under informal investigation.  Six others 
rs 
have been referred to prosecutors for formal investigation. 
Indictments have been brought in four cases against eleven 
persons. 
 
-- Tainan police have received 283 complaints, of which 214 
are under informal investigation.  58 others have been 
referred to prosecutors for formal investigation. 
Indictments have been brought in eleven cases against 48 
persons. 
 
-- Chiayi police have received 53 complaints, of which 40 
are under informal investigation.  Eight others have been 
referred to prosecutors for formal investigation. 
Indictments have been brought in five cases against fifty 
persons. 
 
-- Taitung police have received 34 complaints.  Of these, 
32 are under informal investigation by county police and 
one has been referred to prosecutors for formal 
investigation.  An indictment has been brought in one case 
against one person. 
 
-- Penghu police have received 393 complaints.  Of these, 
193 are under informal investigation by county police and 
199 have has been referred to prosecutors for formal 
investigation.  An indictment has been brought in one case 
against one person. 
 
¶10. (U) Most AIT/K contacts and local political analysts 
consider vote-buying to be practiced less because it is not 
as effective as before and also because it is more and more 
closely monitored by prosecutors.  In Tainan County, where 
283 complaints have been filed already, DPP officials noted 
that there is no question vote-buying exists and that it 
will continue to mutate its forms in order to evade the 
reach or the attention of prosecutors.  Several southern 
DPP officials have suggested AIT/K keep a close eye on the 
southern KMT candidates, noting that these campaigners are 
the most likely to be finding new ways of buying votes, 
since they are running in traditionally green districts. 
On the other hand, during AIT/Ks local visits, southern 
KMT officials appear to be the most concerned about the 
practice of vote-buying.  Many have indicated that the 
central KMT has warned local officials and candidates 
against the practice in any form. 
 
¶11.  (SBU) Comment: Plausible deniability is the name of 
the game in vote-buying activities in southern Taiwan. 
Candidates and party officials are well aware of how 
hamstrung prosecutors feel by the inability to collect 
enough evidence to define any case as one of vote-buying. 
With complaints up by 70%, but with the actual number of 
indictments still low, AIT/K is keeping a close watch on 
what new forms of vote buying may exist that may cause 
complaints, but which keep prosecutors at bay from actually 
bringing cases to trial.  End comment. 
 
THIELE 
 
PAAL