Press Conference on Requesting State Compensation from Taipei City Government for the March 24 Executive Yuan Eviction Incident

On August 7 this year, the Administrative Litigation Division of the Taipei District Court ruled in the "March 24 Executive Yuan Violent Eviction Case" that the Taipei City Government should bear liability for compensation regarding the injury inflicted by police officers on Teacher Lin Ming-hui. This case has also become final as the Taipei City Government decided not to appeal. This ruling is the first successful lawsuit filed by citizens condemning state violence since the March 24 incident occurred a year and a half ago.

In the early morning of March 24, 2014, at the Executive Yuan, the state deployed police violence to evict peaceful assembly participants. The harrowing images of injured victims with bloodied heads shocked the nation. Assisted by pro bono lawyers, the victims successively filed private prosecutions with the Taipei District Court against the responsible officials and police officers. Although the private prosecution cases have seen little progress, the victory in the state compensation lawsuit allows us to see a glimmer of light in the darkness.

According to the aforementioned ruling by the Administrative Litigation Division of the Taipei District Court, regarding the March 24 incident, the Taipei City Government holds the statutory authority and responsibility to decide whether to disperse protests within its jurisdiction, as well as the methods, extent, and scope of such dispersal. Even if ordered and commanded by the central government, the Taipei City Government cannot evade its supervisory responsibility. Therefore, the pro bono legal team will submit a state compensation agreement request to the Taipei City Government today, hoping that the city government will provide compensation to 30 victims who similarly suffered state violence.

In addition, as the competent authority for all police precincts in Taipei City, the Taipei City Government has the responsibility to investigate and publicize the truth of the incident—especially the identities of the "unidentified police officers" who committed acts of violence against citizens—in order to clarify true responsibility attribution and practice fairness and justice. When civil servants execute their duties in accordance with the law, any transgression of the principle of proportionality constitutes an unlawful act. During the March 24 eviction operation, facing citizens engaging in a peaceful sit-in to express their demands, the police truly should not have used violent means to inflict harm on the crowd. If the competent authority fails to thoroughly investigate the identities of the "unidentified police officers," it is tantamount to letting frontline police officers nationwide shoulder the stigma of "illegal abuse of power" together, damaging police morale. Furthermore, regarding the situation where duty police officers concealed their uniform insignia, making it impossible for victimized citizens to identify or verify police identities, let alone conduct subsequent supervision and accountability, this violated Article 4 of the Police Powers and Duties Act and Article 1, Paragraph 2 of the Use of Police Weapons Act. This was also explicitly pointed out and criticized in the aforementioned administrative litigation judgment by the Taipei District Court. In this regard, the Taipei City Government should propose a review report and institutional planning on how to improve in the future, to prevent individual police officers from arbitrarily committing illegal and abusive acts under the cover of riot gear.

Therefore, the pro bono legal team calls upon the Taipei City Government to: 1. Bear state compensation liability; 2. Promptly investigate and publicize the identities of the "unidentified police officers"; 3. Implement the identity identification system for duty police officers.

Appendix

March 24 State Compensation Amount List

Litigant	Claimed Amount
Mr. Huang and 20 others	Claiming NT$400,000 each respectively
Mr. Chiang	Claiming NT$393,782
Mr. Wu and 3 others	Claiming NT$390,000 each respectively
Mr. Hung	Claiming NT$200,000
Mr. Lan	Claiming NT$111,200
Mr. Wu	Claiming NT$100,000
Mr. Li	Claiming NT$38,800
Mr. Pan	Claiming NT$35,000
Mr. Chang	Claiming NT$19,850
Total of 30 people, claiming a combined NT$10,068,632

Photo / Deputy Director-General Lin Shu-hua of the Department of Legal Affairs of the Taipei City Government accepting the request on behalf of the Taipei City Government

Attendees

Litigants / Mr. Wang, Mr. Chang
Pro Bono Lawyers / Attorney Ku Li-hsiung, Attorney Yu Po-hsiang, Attorney Kuo Te-tien

Press Contact

Judicial Reform Foundation Deputy Executive Director / Attorney Chen Yü-fan 02-25231178