A Judicial Detention Farce to Welcome the Year of the Horse?! Press Conference on the Fifth Detention Review for Chang Te-cheng

Chang Te-cheng driving a gravel truck to ram the Presidential Office caused a nationwide uproar. While his actions are certainly unacceptable and he must bear the relevant criminal and civil liabilities, this does not mean the judiciary can abuse the detention system to "purge" any "troublemaker" in the eyes of judicial personnel.

1. The purpose of the detention system is "preservation," not the fulfillment of "instant" justice:

The purpose of the detention system is to "ensure the defendant appears in court" to stand trial, and subsequently to "ensure the defendant serves their criminal punishment" if convicted by a final judgment. It is not meant for the "instant" fulfillment of a sense of justice. Since the authoritarian era, Taiwan's judiciary has been accustomed to using "detention" to satisfy the demand for social peace—putting the cart before the horse. Instead of improving, judicial personnel continue to intimidate the public by claiming that "social security will be endangered," which deserves the harshest condemnation.

Therefore, if there is no risk of the defendant fleeing, no risk of destroying evidence, and the offense is not a serious felony, under current law, the requirements for detention are not met. Furthermore, whether this case will ultimately constitute the serious felony of attempted murder is not entirely free from doubt. Moreover, according to the two Covenants and Judicial Yuan Interpretations, serious felonies cannot serve as the sole ground for detention. The prosecutor's application for detention constitutes an "improper linkage" and violates the "principle of proportionality."