Wu Feng-shan, a two-term member of the Control Yuan, headed a working group of his colleagues that we believe thoroughly reinvestigated the mystery-shrouded shooting in Tainan on March 19, 2004. President Chen Shui-bian, who is now being tried by an appellate court for corruption, was shot by a gunman on that day. Also shot was his vice president Annette Lu. Both were reelected, thanks to sympathy votes cast that day after what police concluded was an assassination attempt took place on the eve of the 2004 presidential election.

Lien Chan, the Kuomintang standard bearer, contested the outcome of the election, appealing for invalidation of Chen's victory, but the appeal was turned down after a recount of votes had been completed. In the meantime, police concluded after a yearlong investigation that Chen Yi-hsiung, an unemployed martial arts coach, bought a homemade handgun and fired two homemade bullets that grazed President Chen's abdomen and hit Lu's knee. Tainan prosecutors dismissed the case on the grounds that the ex-coach committed suicide ten days after shooting the president and the vice president by drowning himself in a Tainan canal, though he was a good diver. He was quoted as telling his wife he did something wrong and would take responsibility. The wife was shown on TV apologizing for what her husband did in video footage shot by her police investigators. She later complained she offered her apology under duress. No smoking gun was found. Nor were there any witnesses who testified. No wonder the New York Times quipped that the closing of the case was like a yarn once found in a dime store.

The Legislative Yuan formed a truth commission, one like the Warren Commission that investigated the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, which was boycotted by the Democratic Progressive Party administration then but probed the shooting incident anyway. The commission couldn't find out the truth and was disbanded.

After President Chen stepped down on May 20 last year, the wife of the alleged gunman appealed to the nation's highest watchdog body for another investigation of the death of her husband. Wu and company obliged.

They claimed they were successful in finding out the gunman did not try to assassinate President Chen. The first shot was directed at Annette Lu, Wu concluded in his investigation report. “It is impossible that if Chen Yi-hsiung wanted to kill President Chen, that he would not aim at President Chen first,” he pointed out, adding: “the prosecutor certainly had no reasonable ground to conclude that he made an assassination attempt.”

On the basis of the reinvestigation and a resultant resolution, the ombudsmen proposed corrective measures and forwarded them to the Executive Yuan and its relevant ministries. If no such measures were taken, the watchdog body could institute an impeachment. Should it involve a criminal offense, the case should be turned over to a court of law. Otherwise, it should be referred to the Commission on the Discipline of Public Functionaries.

Impeached officials may submit a written reply and/or appear before the commission to defend themselves. There are six disciplinary measures which the commission may order: dismissal, suspension from office, demotion, reduction of salary, issuing of a demerit, and reprimand. Only dismissal and reprimand are applicable to political appointees.

That means nothing can be done to punish the top police investigator and prosecutors in charge if they are found responsible for hastily closing the assassination case. None of them were political appointees. Should they be warned of any punishment, they could apply for retirement. Retirees are immune to any such punishment.

On the other hand, the Wu investigation failed to get the truth out. Many people believe the truth cannot be found, no matter how hard investigators may try. The Warren Commission did not find out who actually shot and killed President Kennedy. The truth commission of the Legislative Yuan failed to identify the culprit. Neither could the Wu commission. Nor will any future truth commission. The case will remain a mystery, unless President Chen tells the truth. Will he?

As if this much ado about nothing is not enough, our ombudsmen have just decided to question President Ma Ying-jeou in connection with the alleged Maokong Gondola scandal. They are trying to find out whether there was any possible wrongdoing in the construction of the cable car system that ferried tourists between the Taipei C ity zoo and Maokong Hill. The service was suspended after a number of cable towers had been found crumbling after a typhoon sideswiped Taipei in September 2007. Repairs and reinforcements have yet to be completed, and the Taipei municipal authorities that run the system have promised to reopen the service before the forthcoming Chinese New Year Festival. The first day of the Year of the Tiger falls on next February 14.

The ombudsmen have already questioned Taipei Mayor Hau Lung-bin about how the system was built. They want to find out if Ma was responsible for deciding to build an improperly-designed cable car service, while he was mayor of the capital. We do not know whether they would propose corrective measures and forward them to Ma, if they should discover it was made without due consideration. As president, Ma is immune to criminal prosecution. He cannot implement any improvements based on any possible corrective measures, even if he wanted to.

Why don't our ombudsmen, who believe they are the modern reincarnations of China's imperial censors, remain sinecure retirees?