Taiwan still carries a lot of baggage from its past one-party state days under the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). One particularly large piece of that baggage has been the nation’s need for judicial reform. This need had been long evident, but it could only begin to be met after martial law was lifted in 1987.
Nonetheless, efforts to address this issue with appropriate legislation had long proven futile. Finally, however, in the latest legislative session, a bill called the Judges’ Act (法官法) was passed. What has spurred on this change? There have been several forces at work; one has certainly been and continues to be public awareness of the problem.
The tipping point seems to have been public awareness of abuses in two high-profile murder cases coming at the same time. The first case is one that had been around for a long time, that of the Hsichih Trio (a murder case with many twists and turns dating back to 1991). The second is the recent developments in the wrongful execution of Chiang Kuo-ching (江國慶) in 1997 for a rape and murder case involving a young girl in 1996.
In both cases, among the many flaws and discrepancies in the courts’ guilty verdicts has been that the confessions of all suspects involved were extracted through torture. In the Chiang case, however, an unforeseen break was that another person, Hsu Jung-chou (許榮洲), recently admitted to the crime. With this, the courts and the Judicial Yuan, which had trouble sweeping both cases under the rug at the same time, found a way out.
Recognizing and throwing out confessions that have been illegally achieved through torture and other means is one of the many issues addressed in the Judges’ Act, along with a system that will evaluate judges and remove incompetent ones.
What helped the legislation? Traditionally, Taiwan’s court system has had the unfortunate perception that one is guilty until proven innocent, even if confessions are achieved by torture. In the case of Chiang, it was easy for prosecutors and the courts to admit mistakes in the trial because they had another person, Hsu, who admitted to the murder. In the case of the Hsichih Trio, it is harder for the courts to admit errors and to let the three go because they do not have any guilty parties to replace the suspects with.
However, public awareness has been only half the battle. Steadily working for changes in the system has been the Judicial Reform Foundation, which has been tirelessly at work since 1995. Foundation director Lin Feng-jeng (林峰正) spelled out the issues in this way: Taiwan has a legal system similar to the continental legal system of Europe, and so career judges have had too much power and protection from the Constitution.
Coming out of a one-party state history, Taiwan’s system has been rife with corruption, the interference of politics in court cases — a natural result of a one-party state — and judges who lack the necessary experience and background for making critical judgements. The KMT--dominated Legislative Yuan has had little motivation to change the system because of the one-party state days, while the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has lacked the power to change it.
In the past, one could qualify to be a judge simply by graduating from law school and passing an exam. The new legislation proposes that judges be qualified by a stricter examination system, as in Europe, and that they should preferably be chosen from experienced lawyers. The legislation also proposes the establishment of an independent commission to get rid of poorly performing judges, but here it breaks down from what the Judicial Reform Foundation recommended. The foundation had wanted civilians to also be appointed to the commission, but the current bill has maintained that only judges will pass judgment on their own.
Lin feels here that opposition from the Legislative Yuan in the past has been because too few legislators have actually been lawyers and therefore they do not realize the impact judges have on the court system.
The Judges’ Act has been passed, but the public cannot rest there. Next should be a “Prosecutors’ Act.” Taiwan also needs legislation to guard against abuses of power by prosecutors. For example, at present, prosecutors have too much leeway in applying the Rule of Procedures regarding what evidence can be allowed. Similarly, prosecutors can allow wire-tapping and command a search of a person’s home or office simply on their own discretion. In these areas, as well as pre-trial detention, too much is left up to the prosecutor.
These reforms and future efforts are matters of necessity. Taiwan’s democracy is young and the protection of individual rights is still a work in progress. As for the public, unless they are personally affected by a case, most citizens continue to remain unaware of the reforms needed in the courts.
Jerome Keating is a writer based in Taipei.
There are moments in history when America has turned its back on its principles and withdrawn from past commitments in service of higher goals. For example, US-Soviet Cold War competition compelled America to make a range of deals with unsavory and undemocratic figures across Latin America and Africa in service of geostrategic aims. The United States overlooked mass atrocities against the Bengali population in modern-day Bangladesh in the early 1970s in service of its tilt toward Pakistan, a relationship the Nixon administration deemed critical to its larger aims in developing relations with China. Then, of course, America switched diplomatic recognition
The international women’s soccer match between Taiwan and New Zealand at the Kaohsiung Nanzih Football Stadium, scheduled for Tuesday last week, was canceled at the last minute amid safety concerns over poor field conditions raised by the visiting team. The Football Ferns, as New Zealand’s women’s soccer team are known, had arrived in Taiwan one week earlier to prepare and soon raised their concerns. Efforts were made to improve the field, but the replacement patches of grass could not grow fast enough. The Football Ferns canceled the closed-door training match and then days later, the main event against Team Taiwan. The safety
The National Immigration Agency on Tuesday said it had notified some naturalized citizens from China that they still had to renounce their People’s Republic of China (PRC) citizenship. They must provide proof that they have canceled their household registration in China within three months of the receipt of the notice. If they do not, the agency said it would cancel their household registration in Taiwan. Chinese are required to give up their PRC citizenship and household registration to become Republic of China (ROC) nationals, Mainland Affairs Council Minister Chiu Chui-cheng (邱垂正) said. He was referring to Article 9-1 of the Act
The Chinese government on March 29 sent shock waves through the Tibetan Buddhist community by announcing the untimely death of one of its most revered spiritual figures, Hungkar Dorje Rinpoche. His sudden passing in Vietnam raised widespread suspicion and concern among his followers, who demanded an investigation. International human rights organization Human Rights Watch joined their call and urged a thorough investigation into his death, highlighting the potential involvement of the Chinese government. At just 56 years old, Rinpoche was influential not only as a spiritual leader, but also for his steadfast efforts to preserve and promote Tibetan identity and cultural
RSS