The Tai Ji Men Case: Taiwan Government’s 79 violations of the Law

An in-depth analysis of the bogus Tai Ji Men case from the perspective of criminal law, tax law, the Constitution, international covenants on human rights and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) concluded 79 violations of the law. The injustice should be settled pursuant to law.

• An Unjust Case: Not Guilty and No Tax Evasion

1. Both the Kaohsiung and Hsinchu District Prosecutor’s Offices had conducted investigations on Tai Ji Men in November before Hou Kuanren searched Tai Ji Men Academy on December 19th, 1985. In the investigations, nothing was found to be unlawful and these two cases were closed. Yet, Hou defied the results and conducted an illegal investigation in violation of the principle of no double investigation into the same case, which is protected by the Constitution, the International Human Rights Covenants and Article 14 item 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). The investigation and prosecution by Hou, and the following illegal taxation by the National Taxation Bureau (NTB) are serious infringement on human rights, violating the Constitution, the ICCPR and the UDHR. The illegal bills should be revoked pursuant to law.
   
   
2. Tai Ji Men was illegally taxed due to illegal prosecution by Prosecutor Kuanren Hou. Yet, On July 13, 2007, a final decision was rendered by the criminal court to conclude that there was no criminal offense, no fraud, no tax evasion and no violation of the Tax Collection Act. With respect to the evasion of consolidated income taxes, the decision held that “since the red envelopes provided by the dizi to the shifu were gifts, they are tax-free income under Article 4, Subparagraph 17 of the Income Tax Act. With respect to the business taxes, it was affirmed that “the collective procurement of items such as uniforms for practicing qigong for some dizi on behalf of others was not profit-making business” and had nothing to do with the Shifu and his wife. It is confirmed that there is no tax issue for Shifu and his wife. Since there is no tax problem, the illegal tax bills should have been revoked pursuant to law as well.
   
   
3. In 2009, all innocent defendants received state compensation for wrongful detention, which proved Tai Ji Men’s innocence. Since the prosecutor’s indictment has been discarded by the court, the tax cases derived from the wrongful indictment should have been dropped pursuant to law.
   
   
4. Judgement No. 13 by the Administrative Court in 1940, Judgment No. 18 in 1943, and Judgment No. 16 in 1953 stated “Administrative agencies should determine in accordance with the facts of the criminal judgment.” From the criminal aspect, the fact, evidence, or legality confirmed by judicial procedures must not be determined otherwise for tax purpose. The NTB should revoke illegal tax bills based on the ruling of the criminal court.
   
   
5. Based on the principle that criminal penalty comes before administrative penalty in Article 26 of the Administrative Penalty Act, the criminal case has identified the nature of income as a gift and therefore the result must be adopted by the administrative agency. The illegal tax bill shall be revoked in accordance with the law.
   
   
6. Articles 177 and 178 of the Administrative Litigation Act point out that: for civil, criminal or other administrative disputes involving administrative litigation, the criminal or civil trial should be accepted prior to the administrative litigation so as to avoid courts in different judicial systems delivering different judgements on the same case, which may lead to divergence and inconsistency of the application of the law. On Tai Ji Men’s case, the criminal case that has been accepted prior to the administrative litigation has been clearly ruled that the nature of money is gift. Hence, the administrative court should not deliver a different determination, and the illegal tax bills issued before the criminal ruling should be revoked in accordance with the law.
   
   
7. In the Tai Tsai Sui Tzu No. 09313512360 Circular of September 29, 2004 from the Ministry of Finance, “the results of all instances of trials on this case should be tracked for consideration as well.” In the Tai Ji Men case, the final criminal decision has confirmed that the red envelopes to Shifu were gifts and the procurement handled by the dizis for others was not profit-making business. There is no tax issue at all and thus the illegal tax bills should be revoked pursuant to law.
8. On July 1st, 2011, the Presidential Office issued a letter to the Executive Yuan requesting that the red envelopes to Shifu should be treated as a tax-free income in accordance with the court’s judgment. Since the red envelopes to Shifu are tax-free income, no tax issue should have existed and the illegal tax bill should be revoked.
   
   
9. Kenneth Jacobsen, a renowned American human rights lawyer and legal consultant of former President Bill Clinton who also serves as a core member of Hillary Clinton’s Democratic Party team, commented on the Tai Ji Men case after studying it for almost two years. He pointed out, “I have never seen another case with more procedural justice violations than this case” and “from the prosecutor’s use of the term ‘raising goblets’ as the basis for the indictment, his sanity should be questioned and the whole case should never have gone to court. What’s more, before the prosecution, Prosecutor Kuan-ren Hou never questioned any defendant about “raising goblets” nor gave defendants a chance to make a case. Only after the indictment was announced did he go to Tai Ji Men to search for evidence of raising goblets. This violation of justice is equivalent of shooting an arrow and drawing a bull’s-eye around where it lands by using induced interrogation to frame the parties. Such an absurd indictment by the NTB as the basis for taxation should have not existed and the case should be dropped according to law.
   
   
10. Former U.S. President Bill Clinton’s advisor Kenneth Jacobsen said that since Taiwan’s Ministry of Education determined that Tai Ji Men is not a cram school, the taxation bureau violates due process of law as it continues to assume that Tai Ji Men is a cram school for tax purposes. The taxation bureau repeatedly issued tax bills based on the indictment abandoned in the third criminal trial; this is not a due process. The Taiwan government’s inter-departmental group met and agreed to settle the persecution of Tai Ji Men once and for all through an investigation, but the government falsified the results of the investigation, which is also not proper legal procedure. When the Taipei High Administrative Court and the Supreme Administrative Court ruled in favor of Tai Ji Men, they sent the case back to the original tax officer and the taxation bureau that issued the tax bill. The taxation bureau officers could even receive bonus for their work in tracking down tax evasion, again not in accordance with due process. While taxpayers are stuck between the administration court and the Ministry of Finance, tax officials can issue the same tax bill again and again, causing psychological pressure on the taxpayers and wasting their money and time for more than 10 to 20 years. This is not the proper legal procedure. Tax penalties that do not comply with the proper legal procedure should be invalid.
    
    
11. It is unlawful and violates due process and legal procedures for the tax agency to issue tax bills before the criminal procedures were completed. None of the procedures should be legally recognized, said Yao-yuan Wen, former Taiwan High Court Judge, President of the law court and Trial Spokesperson (President of the Second Instance of Tai Ji Men Criminal Case). The tax decision in violation of the due process of law shall be revoked in accordance with the law.
    
    
12. The first trial of the criminal case of Tai Ji Men was headed by Judge Zirong Zhao. He was the first to use cross-examination to examine the testimony of about 200 witnesses and check the evidence one by one. Eventually he found Tai Ji Men not guilty as he found that the indictment used false evidence and fake facts. He said that the first trial ruling of Tai Ji Men had only one purpose: uphold the freedom of religion, belief, and thought in the dignity of humanity, for which the tax law should also serve. The first, second, and third trial rulings have determined that the nature of the gift should not be interpreted as a cram school tuition. Tai Ji Men was taxed as a cram school in 1992. The tax bill should be revoked according to the law.
    
    
13. The former Kaohsiung National Taxation Bureau Auditor Kun-Guang Huang, who was responsible for tax evasion cases, stated that the Tai Ji Men case was an unjust case. Because there was a series of serious cases, including politically-motivated murders, that had not been solved, the inspection unit used this case as a distraction by accusing crimes of fraud charges and tax evasion. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Tai Ji Men as no crimes committed, no tax, and no violation of the Tax Collection Act and Tai Ji Men received state compensation. The administrative penalties for taxation and the unsettled tax bill of 1992 are due to the Ministry of Finance and the National Taxation Bureau not fulfilling their responsibilities, shifting the blame to the inspection unit of the Ministry of Justice, and illegally inferring tax amount. In the third instance ruling in 1997 it says that Shifu’s income from donation is tax-free income and the treatment is clearly stated in Income Tax Act’s Article 4, Section 1, Paragraph 17. Subjecting tax-free income to taxes is violation of tax code. The tax decision should be rejected.

• Illegal tax bills issued by NTB should not be allowed in a country with the rule of law

14. On December 19, 1996, right after the illegal search of Tai Ji Men academy, fake news was released. It was reported in newspapers the following day that Tai Ji Men allegedly evaded taxes in the amount of NT$3.1 billion. However, the total balance in the two accounts mentioned in the indictment on the day of the raids was around NT$610,000 without any cram school tuition or operating revenue. Later, Kuanren Hou falsely fabricated the sum as NT$3.2 billion. An indictment contains items to be verified and thus cannot be used as a base or evidence for taxation. Yet, the NTB simply relied on the indictment to illegally issued tax bills. Such an unlawful bill should be revoked based upon the law.
    
    
15. On April, 1997, Hou Kuanren abetted the tax collector, Yuehsheng Shih, who had never conducted actual investigations of any academies of Tai Ji Men, offered a false testimony to allege that Tai Ji Men is a cram school that allegedly evaded taxes. Shih’s false testimony became the only testimony in the indictment and the evidence for the accusation against Tai Ji Men. Also, Hou never interrogated Shifu and his wife. The illegal tax bill was issued based on fake witnesses and false testimony. It should be revoked pursuant to law.
    
    
16. The NTB relied simply on the prosecutor’s false, unlawful indictment and the fabricated amount to impose taxes and huge penalties on Tai Ji Men. Shifu and his wife have inquired NTB 29 times in total regarding the legal ground of the evidence of the 3.2 billion tuition fee. There was no reply from the NTB, which violates Article 5 of the Administrative Procedure Law – clarity of administrative action. Based on the law of evidence, the unlawful tax bill should be revoked accordingly.

17. The NTB is clearly aware that in the Tai Ji Men case, the indictment regarded the same fabricated income as proceeds from fraud as well as cram school tuitions and business income, which is seriously self-contradictory. Associate Professor Jingjin Wu, Chairperson of the Department of Law of Aletheia University pointed out that if the income is the proceeds of crime, it shall be confiscated; if it is not, tax shall be levied. There is no co-existence for such two contradictory natures in one proceeds. However, the NTB issued an illegal tax bill without waiting for a criminal ruling to determine the nature of the income, which indicated the bill is unlawful and should be revoked in accordance with the law.
    
    
18. The fact that the NTB failed to ascertain the nature of income according to its duties violates Article 12-1 of the Tax Collection Act, which provides that tax agencies shall assume the burden of proof for facts associated with tax levy. The tax bill issued is illegal and should be revoked according to law.
    
    
19. The NTB violated Article 83-1 of the Income Tax Act and imposed taxes through estimation based on indirect evidence without prior approval of the Ministry of Finance for illegal tax imputation, which violated procedural requirements and tax laws. On November 24, 2009, Chunan Hsu, former Deputy Director-General of the Taxation Administration stated openly that since the NTB could not correct its violation for not obtaining the prior approval of the Ministry of Finance, the NTB should concede defeated after the period for levying the taxes expired and should not issue tax bills anymore. The unlawful tax bills shall be revoked according to law.
    On October 22, 1997, the NTB of Taipei received a letter from the Taipei District Court inquiring about the circumstances of the case. Zhenshou Jian, the Auditor of the NTB, simply copied the information and estimated amount from the Taipei City Field Office and the contents of the prosecutor’s indictment. The investigation report was finished within two days (Oct. 24, 1997) after being instructed, falsely accusing Tai Ji Men as a cram school. Moreover, the parties were not given any opportunity to make a statement, which seriously violated due legal procedures and administrative procedural justice. NTB of Taipei has not fulfilled its burden of proof in accordance with Article 12-1 of the Tax Collection Act, nor has it investigated and proved the amount in the bank account on a case-by-case basis. The unlawful tax bills shall be revoked according to law.
    
    
20. In March, 1998, the NTB of Taipei admitted in its Tsai-Pei-Kuo-Shui-Fa-Tzu No. 87122414 Circular to the NTB of the Central Area that the Tai Ji Men tax case had been investigated by the Bureau of Investigation, not assessed by the NTB of Taipei. This shows that both the NTB of Taipei and of Central Area failed to conduct ex officio investigation before levying taxes. The unlawful tax bills shall be revoked pursuant to law.
    
    
21. The NTB still issued a letter in March, 2000 to the Taipei City Field Office of the Bureau of Investigation, stating that “the details, nature and amount originally assessed by the NTB were based on materials and calculations communicated by your organization.” Again, this shows that the NTB never investigated ex officio. The unlawful tax bills shall be revoked pursuant to law.
    
    
22. According to the criminal judgment of the third instance, it is determined that the red envelopes that Tai Ji Men dizis give to their Shifu are deemed as a gift, tax-exempt income of the recipient according to the law. And in accordance with Article 7 of the Estate and Gift Tax Law, the taxpayer of a gift tax is the donator (the Tai Ji Men dizis), not the recipient (the Shifu). The taxable subject is wrong. It should be revoked.
    
    
23. The NTB decision to tax gifts and tax-exempt income and to tax procurement by dizi for other dizi is making a mistake between the subject and object in taxation. This is illegal taxation and robbery of private property, which should be invalid from the beginning. The NTB should write off the taxes and fines with further undue.
    
    
24. The Taipei NTB and the Taipei City Revenue Service conducted on-site inspections between 1994 and 1996 and confirmed that Tai Ji Men did not sell goods and did not issue any sales tax or profit-making business income tax. In November 1996, the Taipei City Government’s Construction Bureau, which is responsible for business registration, sent clerks to Tai Ji Men for on-site commercial inspections and confirmed that the site is a martial arts practice hall for teaching qigong, with no business activity. Tai Ji Men is not a profit-seeking entity and thus has no business tax, business income tax, or fines from the beginning. Taxation that is inconsistent with the facts should be revoked according to law.
    
    
25. Knowing that the subject of taxation was wrong, the NTB did not investigate the facts pursuant to its duties but still treat the procurement as sales. In addition to imposing taxes in violation of the law, it also imputed penalties in violation of due process of law, the tax law, and accounting principles. More than a dozen cases were derived from wrongful treatment and distortion of nature. NTB also ignored the fact that criminal judgments have ruled no violation of tax code. Therefore, all the wrongful tax decisions should be revoked according to law.
    
    
26. From 1998 to 2002, the Ministry of Finance’s Appeal Committee revoked the original sanctions five times and ordered the NTB to investigate the nature of red envelopes to Shifu. Tai Ji Men dizis put forward tens of thousands of gift declarations, but the NTB only identified 10 as gifts. Tai Ji Men dizis sent letters to inquire how the NTB determined which are gifts but did not get any reply. This violated Article 9 of the Administrative Procedure Law, which asserts taking into account both favorable and unfavorable evidences to the taxpayers. Therefore, it should be revoked according to law.
    
    
27. During the period from 1998 to 2002, the Ministry of Finance’s Appeal Committee revoked the illegal taxation sanctions for five times, all of which ordered the NTB to find out the nature of red envelopes for the Master. The NTB designed its own questionnaire form and conducted a sampling survey. As a result, the 206 Tai Ji Men dizis who were investigated through the questionnaire letter stated that the red envelope for the Shifu is a gift. Hence, the illegal taxation punishment should be revoked according to the survey results.
    
    
28. The Appeal Committee of the Ministry of Finance revoked the original sanctions five times. The NTB conducted malfeasance, forged questionnaire outcome, and continued to lie to the appeal committee members and judges that these were all tuition fees. Furthermore, they did not give the parties an opportunity to make a statement, depriving the people’s rights of appeal and litigation, and depriving the appeal members’ trial rights. It should be revoked according to law.
    
    
29. According to Article 35 of the Tax Collection Act, the review decision should be completed within two months. In the Tai Ji Men tax case, when the NTB was dismissed by the petition committee and the court, NTB always spent more than two months, or even more than three years in making a review decision, which seriously violated the Justice’s Interpretation No. 677— in matters concerning people’s rights and interests, review decisions rendered after expiration of the statutory period are against the Constitution. Therefore, when a tax bill was issued after the period of auditing, the tax bill was issued in an illegal period and should be revoked according to law.
    
    
30. On February 3, 2004, the Taicai v. No. 0920066900 petition decision (the 1991- 1995 comprehensive tax case) dismissed Shifu’s petition. Among the 12 members of Appeal panel, only three were social elites, scholars and experts while the rest are officials of the Ministry of Finance. With only one-fourth of the panelists from social elites, this violated Article 52, Paragraph 2 of the Law of Appeals which asks for half of the panelists to be from social elites. It does not comply with the statutory proportionality and infringes the people’s right to appeal and the right to obtain substantive justice. It should be revoked according to law.
    
    
31. During his tenure as the head of the Central District Tax Bureau, Chonghua Yang, the former deputy director of the Tax Division of the Ministry of Finance, made an unfavorable re-examination decision against Shifu on the comprehensive tax of FY 1991-1995, and continued to issue illegal invoices and impose heavy fines. During his tenure as a panelist of the Appeal Committee, he did not withdraw in accordance with the law (recusal), and dismissed the Shifu’s petition with the Taicai Suzi No. 0920066900 on February 3, 2004 (the 1991-1995 comprehensive tax case). If the system of recusal can be ignored, it will cause serious abuse of power and violations of human rights.
    
    
32. The decision of the Ministry of Finance on August 15, 2002, Taicai Suzi No. 0890066687 (business tax case), rejected Shifu’s appeal, and the business tax case entered administrative litigation. Among the 9 members of the review panelists, none of them are social elites, which seriously violated Article 52, paragraph 2 of the Law of Appeal, which said the social elites should present half of the panelists. The decision infringed on the people’s right to appeal and the right to substantive justice. It should be revoked according to law.
    
    
33. Regarding the business tax issue, Shifu filed a petition on September 22, 2000, and the Ministry of Finance rejected the petition on August 15, 2002. According to the petition law, the rejection was overdue for a maximum of five months, exceeding the statutory time limit. The tax bill shall be revoked according to law.
    
    
34. The statutory verification period is up to 7 years; the NTB illegally issued tax bills more than 20 years ago (since 1986), and the statutory period has already expired. The tax bill is invalid and should be revoked according to law.

• Control Yuan’s investigation found eight major violations of Kuanren Hou and seven major violations of the National Tax Bureau. The mechanism of check and balance fails.

36. In 2002, the Control Yuan took the initiative to investigate. The opinions are as follows and it listed in detail the violations of the criminal procedure law in Prosecutor Kuanren Hou’s investigation and handling of the Tai Ji Men case, such as violations of secret investigation, illegal searches, illegal freezing of assets, infringement of judicial prestige, and serious violations of the defendant’s rights. The eight major violations of rights that harmed the prosecutor’s fair law enforcement image were transferred to the Ministry of Justice for strict disciplinary action. Besides, the indictment was found to be inconsistent with the evidence, and that the prosecution based on the indictment was not conforming to the law of evidence. Hou Kuanren himself also admitted that he did not investigate. According to the Constitution, the two conventions, and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the prosecutor must be punished. This is the duty of the Control Yuan as a supervisory institute, as Control Yuan has the powers, responsibilities, and obligations in the five separations of power in Taiwan. The indictment is a statement to be proved and cannot be used as a basis for taxation. Moreover, the illegal tax bill issued according to the indictment alone should be revoked according to law.
    
    
37. In 2005, the Control Yuan selected the Tai Ji Men case as a major human rights protection case in the “General Report and The Work of Human Rights Protection of the Control Yuan (1999-2005).” “ROC Centenary, Taxation and Human Rights White Paper” listed the Tai Ji Men tax case as an index case. This case is full of numerous violations of due legal procedures and fraud, forged documents, false evidence, and fake witnesses. The illegal taxation derived from illegal prosecution shall be revoked according to law.
    
    
38. The investigation opinion of the Control Yuan in 2009 detailed the responsibilities of the NTB in the Tai Ji Men tax case and seven major violations of the law, including failure in investigation and verification, failure to actively clarify the nature of the income from the case in accordance with its statutory duty, and obvious negligence in verification, as well as the duty to pay attention to both the favorable and unfavorable evidences for the taxpayer. The National Tax Bureau also confessed to Huijun Qian Lin, the member of Control Yuan, that they made a mistake. Since they made a mistake, they should take the initiative to revoke it in accordance with the law.
    
    
39. In 2009, when the Control Yuan was investigating the 206 questionnaire letters, the then Director of the Taipei National Taxation Bureau Zhongyuan Ling forged documents and produced false “Summary Details of the Contents of the Tai Ji Men Letter of Questionnaire Forms” and added the non-existing column to the questionnaire form, which added the content that the dizis did not state and falsely claimed that the gifts for Shifu given by the dizis were given for something in return. The tax bureau deceived the Control Yuan and fraudulently claimed that no dizi claimed that it was a gift. The false tax bill should thus be revoked according to law.

• The people once again prove their innocence.
  Inter-ministerial decision by the Executive Yuan is disregarded by the NTB

40. The Ministry of Education has publicly confirmed that Tai Ji Men is not a cram school for three times. The Taipei National Martial Arts Association, the Chinese Wushu Federation, the Chinese Qigong Association, the Taipei City Taoist Association, and Chinese Taoist Association have all certified that Tai Ji Men is a permanent member of them. In fulfillment of the spirits of qigong martial arts and Taoist groups, Tai Ji Men, a non-profit organization, promotes ancient Chinese culture and purifies people’s hearts. The fact determination by the NTB was wrong and thus the tax bills should be revoked according to law.
    
    
41. In November 2004 at the Taipei High Administrative Court, Liu Lixia, the agent of the NTB of Taipei said, “Tai Ji Men is not a cram school, and the defendant (referring to the NTB) does not deny this fact.” Even though the NTB has recognized at the court that Tai Ji Men is not a cram school, tax bills issued in the name of the cram school tuition were never canceled. The tax bills should have been revoked pursuant to law.
    
    
42. On December 9, 2011, the Executive Yuan Secretary-General called for an inter-ministerial meeting, participated by 30 individuals, including Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Justice, NTB of Taipei, representative of Zhang Men Ren and his wife, 13 Tai Ji Men representative, 2 Social Justice Witnesses. Their resolution includes not using the indictment as the basis of taxation and ask for NTB of Taipei to announce the survey results on the nature of the gift. If the result of the investigation is a gift, the case will be closed in accordance with the law. If the result of the investigation is a tuition fee, the case will be handled in accordance with the law, as evidenced by the translation of the key points of the resolution from the excerpts of the speeches made by the relevant officers at the meeting on that day, which is an administrative contract with evidential force. In the survey, all of the 7,401 respondents indicated that the red envelops to Shifu were gifts, a result consistent with the three instances of criminal decisions. The NTB shall, in good faith and in accordance with its administrative conscience, revoke the illegal tax bills in accordance with the law.

• NTB confessed mistake

The illegal tax bills should be revoked accordingly.

43. The Supreme Administrative Court’s 2018 Judgment No. 422 has determined that Tai Ji Men is a martial arts school that practices qigong, and once again confirmed the nature of the red envelopes in the criminal judgment and in public survey is consistent. What’s more, the NTB has recognized that Tai Ji Men is not a cram school. The taxation basis no longer exists, and the illegal tax bill should be revoked in accordance with the law.
    
    
44. Both the NTB of Taipei and the Central Area have determined that Tai Ji Men is not a cram school in the re-examination decision on August 3, 2012 and on November 27, 2013 respectively. Also, both of them have admitted that the red envelopes to Shifu are gifts, indicating that the taxation base at the beginning in the name of tuition of a cram school was wrong. The facts were found wrong and the applicable law was wrong. The tax bills should be revoked according to law.
    
    
45. It has been no tax issue to Tai Ji Men Qigong Academy since its establishment 55 years ago. The interpretation of the nature of the red envelopes to Shifu should not be different. Why is there a tax issue in the year of 1992? The red envelopes to Shifu were considered cram school tuition in 1992 and gifts in the rest 54 years. The NTB’s arbitrary decision led to violation of the principles of estoppel, administrative consistency, and administrative self-restraint, and infringement on the principle of constitutional equality. The tax bills should be revoked according to law.
    
    
46. The NTB did not conduct a thorough investigation on Tai Ji Men. Instead, it chose three organizations on its own, claiming that they were “in line with Tai Ji Men in nature and scale,” and thus carried out an inferred taxation. What’s worse, the NTB refused to provide the names and data collected from the organizations for the party to verify. NTB’s claims surely cannot be used as the basis for the determination of facts and the basis for judgment. The tax bills should be revoked according to law.
    
    
47. The Taipei High Administrative Court issued two letters in May and July of 2020, stating that the consolidated income tax for FY 1992 should be treated consistently with the other years, in which the tax related to the red envelopes were corrected to zero. It also suggested that the enforcement should be withdrawn in accordance with Article 40 of the Tax Collection Act. The National Taxation Bureau should revoke the tax penalties in accordance with the law.
    
    
48. Former Minister of Finance Qing-zhang Yan, Undersecretary De-han Wang, and Rong-chou Wang have all stated that the Tai Ji Men tax case was derived from the criminal case; if the criminal case is acquitted, the tax penalties will be revoked. The National Taxation Bureau of Taipei’s Director-general Sheng-he Zhang said that if the Tai Ji Men tax case wins the administrative litigation, the National Taxation Bureau will not appeal. The NTB should revoke the tax penalty based on the principle of good faith.
    
    
49. Former Minister of Finance and Former Ambassador of the WTO, Mr. Qing-zhang Yan, said publicly on the 10th anniversary of the Tai Ji Men criminal case’s rehabilitation that there is no reason for the administrative agency not to apply the facts determined by the criminal court. Ten years ago (2007), the Supreme Court already determined that the red envelopes are gifts in nature, not an income, which means there is no issue of income tax
    
    

• Cancer of the Rule of Law, Where is Res Judicata with Fraudulent Judgments?

50. The Supreme Administrative Court, in Judgment No. 422 of 2018, made the latest opinion indicating the National Taxation Bureau of the Central Area failed to take into account new evidences in the decision for tax year 1992. This showed that the tax penalty for the year 1992 was an abuse of law and a wrong tax penalty. Based on the new facts and evidence, the tax penalty should be revoked.
    
    
51. The judge of the Taichung High Administrative Court stated clearly that the ruling should be bound by the High Administrative Court’s Judgment No. 422. Since the Tai Ji Men tax case has been lingering for 23 years, the judge understood the hardship of people’s prolonged litigation and hoped to save administrative and judicial resources by asking the two parties to settle the case in accordance to law. Based on the ruling of the High Administrative Court and the provisions of the Taxpayer Rights Protection Act, the National Taxation Bureau of the Central Area corrected the tax penalties related to the tax for the years 1991 and 1993-1995 to zero in accordance with authority. The illegal tax invoices for FY 1992, which are identical in taxation method and evidence, should also be revoked in accordance with the law.
    
    
52. The National Taxation Bureau of Taipei is the investigating agency of the National Taxation Bureau of the Central Area; the individual income tax penalty of the National Taxation Bureau of Taipei has been revoked by the Taipei High Administrative Court and the Supreme Administrative Court for four consecutive times with a total of 16 judges. The National Taxation Bureau of Taipei has corrected the tax penalties related to the individual income tax and the red envelopes of the year 1996 to zero. The National Taxation Bureau of the Central Area has also corrected the tax penalties related to the red envelopes for the years 1991, 1993-1995 to zero. The taxation method and evidences held are identical to the illegal tax bill for FY 1992, which should be revoked according to the law.
    
    
53. Judge Wu-feng Hsu of the Taichung High Administrative Court ignored the public testimony of his predecessor and conducted a debate without reopening the preparatory hearing. He also privately obtained the parties’ investigation transcripts from the National Taxation Bureau of the Central Area without providing the parties with a chance to make statement in accordance with the law. The judge then used the untrue transcripts as the basis for trial and issued a decision that was contrary to the evidence. This is a blatantly inaccurate ruling, resulting in a false determination of facts, and should be reversed in accordance with the law.
    
    
54. In May 2005, the Taichung High Administrative Court issued a ruling on the same case for different years, revoking the tax penalties for the years 1991, 1993, 1994, and 1995, except for the individual income tax penalties of year 1992. If an apple were to be sliced into 5 pieces, how could one piece become a guava? With false determination of facts and wrong application of law, the tax penalties should be reversed in accordance to law based on the principles of justice, consistency, fairness, equality, trust, protection, reason, and conscience.
    
    
55. Pursuant to the Letter of Law No. 10803504460 of the Ministry of Justice dated March 25, 2019: “If the original sanction is not within the scope of adjudged force, the original sanctioning authority shall be free to decide whether to revoke it in accordance with the provisions (Article 117 of the Administrative Procedure Law).” According to the Supreme Administrative Court’s Judgment No. 422 of 2018, it was determined that the tax bill for 1992 was not subject to res judicata, and the NTB must revoke the sanction according to law.
    
    
56. In accordance with the provisions of Article 3, Paragraph 1 of the Business Tax Law, “The definition of sale of goods is the transfer of ownership of goods to others for a consideration.” Items embalmed of Tai Ji Men such as the uniforms for practicing qigong were collectively procured by certain Tai Ji Men dizi out of the needs of the dizi and were purchased directly from the manufacturer. However, the NTB levied business tax on the collective procurement that do not belong to sales of goods. The Taipei High Administrative Court’s   Lawsuit of 2002 No. 4209 in 2004 ruled that the NTB failed to ascertain whether the case was nonprofit-oriented or business sales in accordance with its duties, and therefore revoked the original illegal punishment. For over ten years, the NTB has yet to prove it according to law, and hence the sanction must be revoked according to law.
    
    

• The taxation punishment which violates the Constitution, the Taxpayers’ Rights Protection Act as well as human rights is no worse than a bandit

57. As of June 19, 2020, among the 792 interpretations made by the justices of the Judicial Yuan, there are a total of 131 tax-related constitutional interpretations, of which 56 laws and interpretation letters have been declared unconstitutional. And 17 out of the 56 are related to the Tai Ji Men unjust tax case, including the principle of equality to Article 7 of the Constitution, freedom of residence and movement  to Article 10, freedom of religion to Article 13, freedom of assembly and association to Article 14, property rights to Article 15, litigation rights to Article 16, the principle of statutory taxation to Article 19, guarantees of other freedoms and rights to Article 22 as well as (Principle of Proportionality)  illegal restriction of  people’s freedom and rights to Article 23.  All those unconstitutional taxation measures must be revoked according to law.
    
    
58. The legislative spirit of the Taxpayers’ Rights Protection Act is to implement the protection of the constitutional rights to life, work, property and other related basic rights. It aims to ensure the taxpayers’ rights, to achieve fair taxation as well as to implement due legal procedures. From the very beginning of the case, the NTB has violated the due process of law, the principle of statutory taxation and the principle of equality in the Constitution and so on and so forth. All the illegal tax bills must be revoked according to law.
    
    
59. According to the provisions of Article 14 of the Taxpayers’ Right Protection Act, the tax calculation must conform to the facts. All the official evidence proves that Tai Ji Men is a menpai of qigong, martial arts and self-cultivation, rather than a cram school or a business enterprise. The business income taxation obviously violates the recognition of business income and must be revoked according to law.
    
    
60. In accordance with Article 14 of the Taxpayers’ Right Protection Act, the estimated taxation must be subject to reasonable and objective procedures and appropriate methods. Taxpayers must not be punished based on the estimated calculation. The NTB violates the Taxpayers’ Right Protection Act and must revoke the illegal bills according to law.

• The judge failed to recuse herself pursuant to law, which violated the two conventions and deprived the interests of the people’s trial

61. Judge Shu-ling Huang, who had participated in the substantive trial of the 1992 Comprehensive Tax Case in Taichung High Administrative Court failed to recuse herself pursuant to law, heard the case in the Supreme Administrative Court and rejected it. Over the past 20 years, Judge Shu-ling Huang has tried 34 proceedings of the Tai Ji Men tax cases, which seriously violated people’s rights to fair trials. The case must be revoked in accordance with the rights to an effective relief and fair trials guaranteed by the two conventions.
    
    
62. The NTB filed an appeal after the taxation of business tax of year 2004 was revoked by the Taipei High Administrative Court. The Supreme Administrative Court is supposed to have a legal trial and the judgement shall be based on the facts ascertained by the Taipei High Administrative Court. However, it skipped the verbal debates of the parties and self-concluded the case. The original judgment was rejected and the case was confirmed, leaving no chance for Tai Ji Men to have an appeal relief. According to the Chief Justice’s Interpretation No. 752: ” In the second trial, the defendant may not appeal to the third trial court if the original judgment of acquittal is reversed and the defendant is found guilty, which does not provide at least one opportunity to appeal and is contrary to the intent of Article 16 of the Constitution, which protects the people’s right to litigation.” This counterattack judgment was found to wrongly ascertain the facts and misuse applicable laws and regulations. It seriously violated people’s right of litigation, and thus the punishment must be revoked according to law.

• Ignoring the conclusion of public hearing, in contempt of the courts, and robbery of private property—human rights violations

63. On June 17, 2010, the public hearing of the Legislative Yuan decided that the Minister of Finance issue a statement to the legislator, saying that “the Ministry of Finance has instructed the NTB of the Central Area, Taiwan Province, to review the specific facts and proceed in accordance with Article 40 of the Tax Collection Law.” The NTB of the Central Area and the Miaoli branch also sent a letter to the Hsinchu branch of Administrative Enforcement Agency stating that the comprehensive income tax and penalty cases from 1991 to 1996 were based on the same basic facts. If they have different opinions, they may severely affect the rights and interests of taxpayers.

The execution should be suspended in accordance with the third proviso of Article 9 of the Administrative Execution Law. Based on the principle of good faith, it should be revoked according to law.

64. After the public hearing of the Legislative Yuan, the NTB of the Central Area issued a letter to the Ministry of Finance on June 23, 2010, explaining the feasibility of withdrawing enforcement execution of the Tai Ji Men comprehensive tax case of 1992 in accordance with Article 40 of the Tax Collection Law. The letter stated at the end that if the results of the appeals in the other five annual comprehensive tax cases at that time were inconsistent with the 1992 judgment, the NTB of the Central Area will revoke the 1992 comprehensive tax bill in accordance with Article 117 of the Administrative Procedure Law. Later, the results of the other five years’ comprehensive tax case proved Tai Ji Men’s innocence. Therefore, the NTB should revoke the 1992 comprehensive tax bill in accordance with its commitment in the official document and in accordance with Article 117 of the Administrative Procedure Law.
    
    
65. The Hsinchu branch of the Administrative Enforcement Agency failed to complete the required inspections on all lands, and went on auction illegally. After the second bid was passed, the NTB immediately accepted the price and nationalized it. The NTB and the Administrative Enforcement Agency ignored court judgments and letters, violated administrative procedures and held illegal auctions. They should have revoked the tax bill in accordance with the law.
    
    
66. The Legislative Yuan has the power to supervise the administration. So far, more than 300 legislators, regardless of party affiliation, have repeatedly signed, proposed, questioned, or held press conferences, public hearings, and coordination meetings. They directly pointed out the misconducts of the NTB and requested the withdrawal of illegal tax bills. The NTB deceived the legislators and should revoke the illegal tax bill in accordance with the law.
    
    
67. The NTB knew that it was a serious contradiction to refer to the same amount of money as fraudulent income, tuition fees and operating income in the criminal indictment. It did not follow the legislative intent of Article 177 of the Administrative Procedure Law and waited for the criminal judgment to determine the nature of the income. Based on the indictment, the NTB issued the illegal bill in 1997. While the criminal case was still in the court trial stage in 1999, 82 legislators jointly signed a request for the NTB to revoke the illegal tax sanctions because the NTB violated procedural justice while issuing a tax bill. NTB violated the due legal procedure and ignored the substance. The NTB should revoke the illegal tax sanctions in accordance with the law.
    
    
68. In 2013, 33 legislators jointly signed a joint proposal, requesting the Ministry of Finance to cancel the illegal sanctions based on the inter-ministerial resolution of the Executive Yuan on December 9, 2011 and the announcement of the investigation results—the fact of giving gifts. The NTB should immediately revoke it in accordance with the law.
    
    
69. In April, 2015, legislator Tian-cai Xu questioned Minister of Finance Sheng-he Zhang. Sheng-he Zhang promised: “I will revoke it if the court decides it is a gift for the Shifu!” The ruling of the third criminal trial in 2007 and the Supreme Administrative Court’s ruling in 2018 both recognized the red envelopes as gifts. Based on the principle of good faith and Article 53 of the Constitution, the administration should be revoked according to law.

• Violations of the principle of equality. Persecution of faith and cultural rights

70. Letter No. 03378, Tax 2 of the Taiwan Provincial Taxation Bureau in 1987 and letter No. 841634845 of the Ministry of Finance in 1995 both stipulate that qigong martial arts groups are not required to register for profit under the law, and they are not within the scope of business tax. Tai Ji Men is a permanent group member of the Taipei Martial Arts Association, the Chinese Martial Arts Federation, and the Chinese Qigong Association. Members of these groups have never been taxed by the NTB for receiving gifts from dizis. It violated the principle of equality to levy Tai Ji Men only.  The tax bills should be revoked according to law.
    
    
71. Pursuant to the Tai-Tsai-Shui-No. 33031 Circular of April 29, 1975 from the Ministry of Finance, which interprets that “gifts received by church preachers from believers shall be exempt from income taxes,” the red envelopes received by the Zhang-men-ren of Tai Ji Men from his dizi are tax-free income, which is the same in nature as those received by the monks and pastors of tens of thousands of religious groups in Taiwan as they are all gifts and tax-free income. Tai Ji Men is a member of the ROC Taoism Association and the Taipei Taoism Association. The taxation bureau should follow the law and revoke all tax bills to Tai Ji Men.
    
    
72. Tai Ji Men dizi provided 4,645 witness testimonies for gifts on July 14, 1998, another 5,000 affidavits on March 1, 2002, and 3,000 statements of gifts between September 2002 to April 2003. An inter-ministerial meeting was held on December 9, 2011 and resolved that the nature of the red envelopes should be investigated and confirmed in the form of a public survey. A total of 7,401 replies were received in the public survey, and all confirmed the intention of the givers was a monetary gift. Numerous documentary evidence has repeatedly stated that the nature of the red envelope is “gift.” According to Article 406 of the Civil Law, ” A gift is a contract whereby the parties agree that one of the parties delivers his property gratuitously to another party and the latter agrees to accept it.” The NTB violated the true intentions of the parties to the freedom of contract, interpreting that the red envelopes that the Tai Ji Men dizi gave to Zhang-men-ren were tuition fees, which severely infringed and distorted the freedom of contract and freedom of expression of the property rights of the Tai Ji Men dizi, also violated Article 15 of the Constitution to protect property rights and the Constitution’s other freedoms and rights guaranteed by Article 22.
    
    
73. According to Article 15 of The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), the state should “eliminate all forms of discrimination to ensure that everyone can exercise the right to participate in cultural life”, and “cultural groups should be preserved and promoted in a legal manner.” The Supreme Administrative Court’s Judgment No. 422 in 2018 determined that Tai Ji Men was a martial art school of qigong and martial arts. However, the National Tax Bureau still imposed the comprehensive tax of year 1992 in the name of the cram school, illegally forcibly auctioned the land of Tai Ji Men, which violated the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), and the unlawful sanctions shall be revoked according to law.
    
    
74. The NTB must levy taxes in accordance with the law and evidence. If it believes that the “red envelopes” gifted to Zhang-men-ren by Tai Ji Men dizi in 1992 are tuition fees, it must bear the burden of proof. The three instance criminal judgments, the Supreme Administrative Court’s decision, and the result of Tax Bureau’s public survey, etc., all officially confirmed that the red envelope is a gift. The NTB has absolutely no basis or objective reason to impose different sanctions on Tai Ji Men in different years and treat it differently from other martial arts and religious groups. This obviously violates the provisions of the ICCPR, which should have reasonable and objective reasons for different treatment, and violates the two conventions (Articles 2, 26 of the ICCPR, Article 2 of the ICESCR) and the Constitution of the Republic of China (Article 7)’s core principle of equal rights protection and non-discriminatory treatment. The unlawful sanctions shall be revoked according to law.
    
    
75. As of December 31, 2020, in total, the Tai Ji Men tax cases had undergone 25 decisions on re-examinations and 35 decisions on administrative appeals (including repeated administrative appeals), involving 387 officials hearing the administrative appeals (including repeated administrative appeals), 1,126 judges, 230 decisions, 74 court hearings. In court hearings, among them, 11 judges tried more than (including) 30 Tai Ji Men tax cases, and none of them recusal in accordance with the law. It has consumed huge administrative resources, judicial resources, waste of public funds and social costs. According to the effective remedy guaranteed by the Constitution and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), this unlawful case shall be revoked in accordance with the law.
    
    
76. Prosecutor Kuanren Hou began to freeze all the assets of the Zhang-men-ren and his wife on December 23, 1985. The NTB has repeatedly prohibited dispositions on the property of the Zhang-men-ren and his wife for more than two decades. In the process of administrative relief, the NTB lost 18 times, but the taxation agency kept re-examining. The victory of taxpayers is not a real victory. It also caused the ” everlasting tax bill “, which not only severely deprived the people of the opportunity to obtain timely and effective judicial remedies, also violated Article 16 of the Constitution for the protection of people’s litigation rights and Article 7 of the intention of equal rights. The long-standing litigation is undoubtedly a persecution of the people’s property and freedom, and it also violates the protection of human rights in Articles 15 and 23 of the Constitution, and the effective remedies of Articles 2 and 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). This case should be revoked in accordance with the law.
    
    
77. In summary of all malfeasance violations of the NTB, including concealing facts, concealing evidence, forging documents, and defying judicial judgments, ignoring the investigation and correction of the Control Yuan, violating the resolutions of the Executive Yuan’s inter-ministerial meeting, defrauding legislators, ignoring the constraints of the Examination Yuan’s Civil Servants’ Disciplinary Law, etc. ,the NTB has overstepped the Powers of the Presidency and Five Yuans (five pillars of the government), arrogated its authority, and collided with the five-power constitutional system. Its crimes have shaken the foundations of the five separations of power and this nation. Over the past two decades, all official evidence has proved that Tai Ji Men is not guilty and tax-free, and the case is indeed caused by the government’s mistake. Our country has the obligation and responsibility to rectify wrongful and false cases and illegal tax bills should be revoked in accordance with the law.
    
    
78. In the fabricated Tai Ji Men case, officials who violated the law over the past 25 years have continuously flouted justice, undermined the Constitution system, undermined freedom of religion, freedom of belief, and freedom of cultural life, imposed illegal sanctions, illegal seizures and excessive seizures, and seriously encroached on civilian property for more than 20 years. This has deprived the freedom of people to use their own property rights, and even illegally executed auctions, snatched people’s property, and illegally nationalized them. The people have not only lost property rights, but also been deprived of their basic right to survival, which violates Article 17 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: 1. Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others. 2. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property. Officials who violate the law have seriously harmed the country, harmed the people, infringed on human rights, and violated the cultural life rights protected by the ICCPR and ICESCR. The long-term inability to freely exercise the right to promote the culture of Tai Ji Men, the concept of world peace and love, and the culture of conscience has caused Tai Ji Men’s Shifu and Dizi to be in pain for more than two decades! Prosecutor Hou, Kuan-Ren and the NTB have jointly falsified the Tai Ji Men criminal and tax fraud case, which has been harassing Tai Ji Men’s Shifu and dizi for many years, making people miserable, inextricable, and very inhumane. It is indeed a human tragedy, and a serious violation of the Constitution, the ICCPR, ICESCR, and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Illegal tax bills that have been delayed for more than 20 years shall be revoked in accordance with the law.

• Unlimited prosecution of state power. Transitional justice starts from here

79. This case was an illegal prosecution by the prosecutor Hou on behalf of the state against the people, illegally snatching people’s property, causing loss of people’s property, damage to their personality and reputation, and more than 20 years of long-term painful torture. Not only is it a serious waste of public funds, judicial resources, administrative resources and huge social costs, it also severely violates human rights, harms the people and the country. Prosecutor Hou defied justice, undermined the court, and seriously violated the Constitution, the ICCPR, ICESCR, and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. He used the public power to bully the people, persecute freedom of religion, freedom of belief, and freedom of cultural life and other crimes that are heinous. The illegal tax bills derived from its illegal prosecution shall be revoked in accordance with the law.

Article 29 of the Rome Statute provides that the crime against humanity should not be subject to any statute limitation.  70 years after the end of the Second World War, in July 2015, a German court still sentenced Oskar Gröning, a 94-year-old former Nazi, to four years in prison.  On the opposite, in Taiwan, the Ministry of Justice used the excuse of “waiting until the criminal verdict is confirmed” and illegally passed it to the High Prosecutor’s Office to “re-investigate whether there is any violation of law”. After the verdict of acquittal and no taxation was confirmed in the third trial on July 13, 1996, The Ministry of Justice and the High Prosecutor’s Office again used the excuse that the 10-year statute of limitations had expired and Kuanren Hou could not be held accountable. The period limitation is codified in the Article 80 of Criminal Code.  The Sec.2 of Article 80 reads “these periods specified in the preceding paragraph shall commence from the day on which the offense is committed; provided that the offense is of a continuing nature, when the period shall commence from the last day on which the offense is completed.” Hence for the offense in continuity, the limitation period should start from the end of offense.  Article 83 of Criminal Code reads “the period of limitation of prosecution shall be terminated with the initiation of prosecution.” Since the right of prosecution has been initiated when entering the stage of criminal trial, there is no longer any issue of limitation overdue. Hou started the illegal prosecution in 1996 and the Control Yuan conducted the investigation in 2000 and the investigation report was completed in 2002, which was referred to the Ministry of Justice for punishment. At that time, the statute of limitations had been suspended, and there were only six years between the date of Kuanren Hou’s offence and the completion of the investigation by the Control Yuan. Hence, there was no overdue at all. In addition, the Control Yuan referred Hou Kuan-Jen to the Ministry of Justice for punishment in 2002, requesting the Ministry of Justice to punish, rather than requesting a new investigation. Moreover, from 1997 until today, Hou Kuan-Jen’s persecution of Tai Ji Dizi has not stopped. The NTB still uses the information from Hou Kuan-Jen’s unlawful indictment 25 years ago, which has been abandoned by the criminal court, to force taxation, and even illegally refers it to the Administrative Enforcement Agency to forcibly auction off the land designated for Tai Ji Dizi ‘s practice and forcibly repossess it. In addition, in order to realize transitional justice, it is common practice to allow indefinite recourse for prosecution against human rights by public authority.  The illegal tax bill derived from Hou’s unlawful prosecution should also be revoked.

Judge Zeng-yi Tsai, when worked on a robbery case in the Taipei District Attorney’s Office, was found by the Control Yuan to have violated objectivity and the presumption of innocence, and to have committed serious negligence in the process.  Judge Tsai was impeached by all 13 votes. On the other hand, Kuan-ren Hou was listed by the Control Yuan as having committed eight major offences.  Despite the relatively severity of Hou’s offences, he got no punishment and even promoted to the Deputy Director of the Agency Against Corruption. Prosecutors are acting on behalf of state and their offences constitute state violence, which should not be subject to any limitation of recourse. For example, the impeachment of former Civil Service Commission Chairman Mu-Chin Shi for improperly accepting hospitality when he was the president of the court in 1997, the 2006 compensation for the 228 incident, which resulted in tragic deaths and injuries to the public due to the government’s improper use of state power, and the compensation for the Guoqing Jiang case in 1985 all exceeded the 10-year statute of limitations on disciplinary actions. This proves that there is no statute of limitations for the abuse of state power by non-judges that causes significant infringement of human rights.

Article 24 of the Constitution reads “Any public functionary who, in violation of law, infringes upon the freedom or right of any person shall, in addition to being subject to disciplinary measures in accordance with law, be held responsible under criminal and civil laws.” According to Chapter 9 ‘Control’, the Control Yuan shall be the highest control organ of the State. When the Control Yuan deems a public functionary in the Central Government or in a local government guilty of neglect of duty or violation of law, it may propose corrective measures or institute an impeachment. If it involves a criminal offense, the case shall be turned over to a law court.  There is no period limitation with respect to the Control Yuan’s authority in the Constitution or the Control Act. There should be no statute of limitations for human rights persecution by state violence. Prosecutor Hou’s oppression on Tai Ji Men has lasted for a long time and he should be sacked and put into trial.  

According to the Act to Implement the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the two Covenants are domestic laws that are superior to national laws. Article 3 and Article 4 read “Whenever they exercise their functions, all levels of the governmental institutions and agencies should confirm to human rights protection provisions in the two Covenants.”  According to Article 2 of ICCPR, each State to the Covenant is required to ensure that any person whose rights or freedoms as herein recognized are violated shall have an effective remedy. According to the Sec. 8 of General Comments No.31 of ICCPR, the positive obligations on States Parties to ensure Covenant rights will only be fully discharged if individuals are protected by the State, not just against violations of Covenant rights by its agents but also against acts committed by private persons or entities; Sec. 16 of General Comments No.31 reads “Article 2, paragraph 3, requires that States Parties make reparation to individuals whose Covenant rights have been violated. Without reparation to individuals whose Covenant rights have been violated, the obligation to provide an effective remedy, which is central to the efficacy of article 2, paragraph 3, is not discharged.” Such reparation includes, among others, bringing to justice the perpetrators of human rights violations. Sec. 18 of General Comments No. 31 also indicated that States Parties must ensure that those responsible are brought to justice. As with failure to investigate, failure to bring to justice perpetrators of such violations could in and of itself give rise to a separate breach of the Covenant. Accordingly, where public officials or State agents have committed violations of the Covenant rights referred to in this paragraph, the States Parties concerned may not relieve perpetrators from personal responsibility, as has occurred with certain amnesties and prior legal immunities and indemnities.

In summary, the taxation case derived from the criminal case, the taxation penalty imposed by the NTB on Tai Ji Men has violated the legal procedures from the beginning and has major flaws, meaning the tax bill should be invalid and should not last for 25 years. Moreover, they should not force auctions when knowing the case’s illegality of taxation. It is as if they knew that the person was wrongly sentenced to death, and yet they still made the mistake and shot him dead. This is also a violation of the law, a serious violation of human rights, and an injury to the country and to the people. In accordance with our Constitution, the International Covenants on Human Rights, and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Ministry of Justice should immediately remove Kuanren Hou from office and impose the most severe punishment to demonstrate the effectiveness of constitutional oversight and the separation of powers. The Ministry of Finance. NTB. And the Administrative Enforcement Agency should revoke all illegal tax penalties, cancel illegal auctions, and return the land that was confiscated to Tai Ji Men, to clear Tai Ji Men’s name and bring justice.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights sets out the fundamental human rights, including the rights to freedom of expression and of belief, and free from fear and shortage.  When reviewing the cases handled by prosecutor Kuan-ren Hou, such as the Ren-Shen case Zhou, Ying-Jeou Ma’s special allowance case and the Yunlin waste case, it is not difficult to find out that Hou is not a stranger to the procedural injustice.  He used to abuse his authority to proceed prosecution by means of oppression. People were scared by his cruel tactics. Hou should be disciplined by the biggest punishment ever in accordance with the Constitution, ICCPR, ICESCR, and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. In addition, all the illegal tax bills and unlawful enforcement and auction should be revoked, and the confiscated and nationalized lands should be returned so as to clear the name of Tai Ji Men.