Independent Yet Insular Judiciary: Press Conference on the "Top 10 Judicial News Stories of 2005"

The year 2005 came to a close amidst the brilliant fireworks of Taipei 101 and the gasps of hundreds of thousands of spectators, serving as a final salute to a tumultuous year in the judiciary that continuously left the public in astonishment.

The judiciary in 2005 was a source of both joy and sorrow.

On the joyful side, the judiciary's awareness and self-respect regarding its independence were firmly established. From the finalization of the "invalid election" and "invalid election outcome" lawsuits stemming from the 2004 presidential election, to rulings dismissing defamation and tort lawsuits filed against former and current presidents, the judiciary seemed to be declaring to society: the judiciary will not allow political dust to tarnish it!

Furthermore, the Criminal Code underwent its first major amendment in seventy years since its promulgation and enforcement; the Council of Grand Justices rendered its very first provisional injunction ruling (Interpretation No. 599), effectively preventing the possibility of irrevocable harm to people's rights; and the Grand Justices reaffirmed the concepts of privacy and human dignity in Interpretation No. 603, declaring paragraphs 2 and 3 of Article 8 of the Household Registration Act ("fingerprinting as a requirement for issuing national ID cards") unconstitutional, thereby preventing Taiwan from regressing into a police state. These developments also demonstrated the judiciary's proactive attitude.

However, the judiciary still failed to break free from its insular framework and step out of its ivory tower. The ruling in the "Glass Doll" case, the verdict in the case of Yang Ju-men (the "100-meter bomber"), the notion that presidents lack freedom of speech, and defamation damages reaching as high as 10 million NTD once again sparked public shock and outcry. On the other hand, the judiciary's complacent attitude toward its own disciplinary issues further heightened public dissatisfaction and disappointment. When the judiciary is disconnected from society yet holds others to strict standards while excusing its own, the public will still not trust it, even if it is independent.

Tomorrow is Judicial Day (January 11). Once the judiciary has firmly established its foundation of independence and autonomy, we hope it will not walk down the path of arrogance and self-isolation within its ivory tower. We look forward to efforts toward achieving judicial quality with greater procedural transparency, more sophisticated reasoning in judgments, and more human-centered services, thereby building a judiciary worthy of public trust.

Top 10 Judicial News Stories of 2005

1. Constitutional Interpretation Case on Fingerprint Archiving
   The Ministry of the Interior originally planned to take advantage of the nationwide replacement of national ID cards starting July 1, 2005, to establish a universal fingerprint identification database. Following widespread protests by civic groups, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislative Caucus filed a petition for constitutional interpretation regarding Article 8 of the Household Registration Act on May 30, 2005. In an unprecedented move, the Council of Grand Justices issued a provisional injunction on June 10 via Interpretation No. 599 to freeze the Ministry of the Interior's recording measures, subsequently holding explanatory sessions and oral arguments before declaring paragraphs 2 and 3 of Article 8 of the Household Registration Act unconstitutional through Interpretation No. 603 on September 28.
   Brief Commentary
   Regarding the fingerprint archiving case, the Judicial Yuan's Council of Grand Justices first established the Grand Justices' power of Preliminary Injunction via Interpretation No. 599, and then expounded upon the meaning of the right to privacy in Interpretation No. 603, holding that the Ministry of the Interior's related administrative measures violated the principle of proportionality and infringed upon people's rights. These two interpretations are of monumental significance. Moving forward, provisional injunctions can be applied whenever matters concern significant rights and interests of the people and where the resulting harm is irreparable. Furthermore, the concept of human dignity re-clarified by Interpretation No. 603 has a profound and far-reaching impact on human rights protection, making this a pivotal event in judicial history.
   
   
2. Outbreak of Multiple Judicial Discipline Scandals
   In July 2005, prosecutor Chen Cheng-ta was implicated in conspiring with an investigator to smuggle firearms, fake a solved case, and frame an innocent person; in September, prosecutor Hsu Wei-yu was exposed for using his official powers to extort bribes from parties involved in a case; in September, Chia-i District Court judge Kan Ta-kung was reported by the media to have been drinking at a KTV establishment accompanied by female hostesses; Miaoli District Court judge Yao Ming-hung and his wife obtained interest-free loans from a case litigant to purchase a house; Shihlin District Court judge Chen Mei-chin became embroiled in a scandal involving inappropriate interactions with a netizen; and former High Court judges Chang Ping-lung and Lo Chi-hsiung, who were implicated in bribery cases, were acquitted upon retrial after multiple remands.
   Brief Commentary
   Upholding integrity is a fundamental prerequisite for judicial personnel. Yet, disciplinary cases involving judicial officers—which should have gradually decreased alongside judicial reform—unexpectedly erupted in multiples in 2005, and past cases of judges prosecuted for bribery largely resulted in acquittals. Such a complacent judiciary is truly disheartening. We believe that advancing the Judges Act brooks no delay; without a comprehensive legal framework to handle personnel issues among judicial officers, sporadic cases like these will continue to occur, severely damaging public trust in the judiciary. The government must summon the political will to complete the legislation of the Judges Act and vigorously purge these few judicial scoundrels; otherwise, the judiciary will never earn the public trust it deserves.
   
3. Issues Related to the Death Penalty Spark Public Discussion
   In February 2005, a man surnamed Sung caused a car accident resulting in the death of an infant. The infant's father, surnamed Chiang, along with four accomplices, beat Sung to death. In April, the Hualien District Prosecutors Office indicted Chiang and the five others, seeking the death penalty for all of them—a judicial precedent. In April, two police officers from the Hsichih Police Station were attacked by the Wang brothers who seized their guns, leaving one dead and one injured. After arresting the two suspects, the Prosecutor-General instructed that the death penalty be sought, and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs even proposed amending the law to mandate the death penalty for police killers. Three representatives, including the Vice President of the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), visited Taiwan in September to conduct a fact-finding report on the current status of the death penalty in Taiwan, meeting with President Chen Shui-bian and Minister Morley Shih, and receiving concrete responses in which both committed to the gradual abolition of death penalty in Taiwan. In October, Premier Frank Hsieh issued a guarantee letter to the Swiss Supreme Court promising that Andrew Wang would not face the death penalty. In November, the Executive Yuan Cabinet passed amendments to Articles 333 and 334 of the Criminal Code, changing the punishment for piracy resulting in death and compound piracy offenses from the sole penalty of death to relative discretionary death penalties. On December 26, two brothers surnamed Lin in Kaohsiung whose death sentences for murdering a neighbor (resulting in one death and one injury) were finalized were executed after the Minister of Justice signed the execution warrant, marking Taiwan's second and third executions of the year. The news sparked dissatisfaction from the Taiwan Alliance to End the Death Penalty, prompting the Ministry of Justice to state that it would study the introduction of a suspended death sentence system.
   Brief Commentary
   Abolishing the death penalty is an international human rights trend; only countries that respect the right to life can be truly called human rights nations. The DPP government claims to build the nation on human rights, promised visiting foreign guests that it would abolish the death penalty, and was even willing to issue a guarantee to Switzerland to spare Andrew Wang from execution. However, its administrative actions have proven to be mere lip service without substantial backing, as the proportion of prosecutors seeking the death penalty failed to decrease and even reached exaggerated levels. The policy and its implementation are evidently contradictory, which is hardly surprising given its declining approval ratings!
   
   
4. Two Presidential Election Lawsuits Reach Finality
   Following the 2004 presidential election, Lien Chan and James Soong respectively filed lawsuits against Chen Shui-bian, Annette Lu, and the Central Election Commission, alleging an invalid election outcome and an invalid election. By the end of 2004, the Taiwan High Court ruled against Lien and Soong in both cases. After Lien and Soong appealed, the Supreme Court dismissed their appeals in June and September 2005 respectively, thereby bringing all election-related litigation to a close. In accordance with an agreement with Kingston Technology Corporation, the Judicial Reform Foundation (JRF) also transferred over 17 million NTD out of a 100-million NTD donation from Kingston to subsidize the vote-recount expenses incurred by Lien and Soong.
   Brief Commentary
   Following the 2004 presidential election, society was gripped by turmoil. The Lien-Soong camp chose to resolve the dispute through the judiciary, winning public support, and Mr. David Sun of Kingston Technology was willing to shoulder the vote-recount costs by donating 100 million NTD to the JRF. After nearly a thousand lawyers fully cooperated to conduct the vote recount following the election, all litigation was finally concluded in 2005. Although this briefly provoked dissatisfaction from the losing camp and acts attacking the judiciary, from a long-term perspective, the Taiwanese judiciary's ability to resolve disputes remains affirmed, and the majority of people still accept the judiciary's final judgments.
   
   
5. "Glass Doll" Verdict Sparks Public Discussion
   In August 2005, the Taiwan High Court ruled that a student named Chen, who had kindly tried to help, along with Chingwen High School, should be jointly and severally liable for damages resulting from an accident where student Chen dropped a classmate with brittle bone disease (a "glass doll"), leading to the classmate's death. The verdict caused an uproar across society.
   Brief Commentary
   The fact that a court judgment could diverge so drastically from common social sense is what makes this ruling worth pondering. Whether a person who kindly helps others should bear liability for damages, whether it will trigger a chilling effect, or whether it will cause confusion in social values are all aspects that judges must comprehensively and thoroughly consider when rendering judgments. This verdict sparked debate precisely because of insufficient legal reasoning in the judgment, and a written judgment lacking detailed reasoning naturally cannot convince the general public. The judiciary we anticipate should be a more sophisticated and higher-quality judiciary; judges have an obligation to provide more detailed reasoning in judgments so that the general public can understand.
   
   
6. Legislature Passes Criminal Code Amendments
   The most sweeping amendment to our nation's Criminal Code since its promulgation seventy years ago was finally passed in its third reading by the Legislative Yuan in February 2005. The core focus of this amendment was the General Provisions. Proposed by the Ministry of Justice in 1990, it took 14 years to complete. The scope of amendments included the definition of civil servants, narrowing the scope of deprivation of citizen's rights, expanding the scope of application of commutation to a fine, establishing a "three-strikes" rule for serious crimes, implementing a rule denying parole for untreated sex offenders, raising the threshold for parole eligibility for life imprisonment, raising the execution ceiling for concurrent offenses to 30 years, and abolishing the provisions for "continuous offenses" and "compound offenses."
   Brief Commentary
   Promulgated and enforced since 1935, the Criminal Code was no longer suited to the needs of modern society. The Ministry of Justice began drafting amendments around 1974, finally submitting a draft in 1990, which after another 14 years was finally passed. The scale of this amendment is unprecedented, with virtually the entire Criminal Code system overhauled. The Ministry of Justice's "balancing leniency and severity" policy is also reflected in this amendment. However, the effectiveness of such a criminal policy remains to be seen after its implementation begins in July 2006. This amendment will be an event of profound and far-reaching impact on Taiwan's judiciary.
   
   
7. Former and Current Presidents Sued for Defamation and Tort; Both Lose Lawsuits
   Regarding a case where former President Lee Teng-hui accused People First Party Chairman James Soong of "abandoning protesting crowds to go play mahjong" on the night of April 10, 2004, the Taipei District Court ruled on November 16 that Lee Teng-hui should pay 10 million NTD in damages. Meanwhile, lawsuits were filed by Lien Chan and James Soong against President Chen Shui-bian over his remarks alleging that pan-Blue camp leaders were involved in a soft coup following the presidential election; the Taipei District Court ruled against Chen Shui-bian on December 21. These two judgments respectively set records in judicial history for former and current presidents being ruled against.
   Brief Commentary
   Strictly speaking, these two historic judgments still suffer from the flaw of unclear reasoning. Questions such as why James Soong's damaged right to reputation warranted 10 million NTD in non-pecuniary damages, and whether President Chen Shui-bian truly lacked freedom of speech, still leave room for debate. Nevertheless, setting aside the flaws in the judgments, these two rulings still hold positive value within the judicial system—namely, demonstrating to society that judicial independence is no longer something that any political force can interfere with.
   
   
8. Prosecutor-General Wu Ying-chao Resigns
   On December 27, 2005, Prosecutor-General Wu Ying-chao announced that he would take responsibility for the results of the "three-in-one" local elections and decided to resign to process his retirement, setting records as the first Prosecutor-General to step down via voluntary resignation and the one with the shortest tenure. The reasons behind Wu Ying-chao's resignation sparked external debate.
   Brief Commentary
   Prior to taking office, Wu Ying-chao had already faced questioning from the Judicial Reform Association (JRA) and the JRF, which repeatedly expressed to President Chen Shui-bian their views that he was unsuited for the position. Meanwhile, the Prosecutorial System Reform Alliance—jointly formed by the JRF, JRA, and other groups—vigorously pushed for amendments to the Court Organization Act, intending to change the appointment of the Prosecutor-General to require parliamentary consent, a bill that was gradually gaining bipartisan support in the Legislative Yuan. Therefore, although outsiders made various political speculations regarding Wu Ying-chao's resignation, his downfall was in fact only a matter of time. To the JRF, it came as no surprise at all; instead, it should be viewed as President Chen's support for prosecutorial system reform, meaning outsiders really need not read too much into it.
   
   
9. Hsu Tzu-chiang Case Remanded for Retrial
   The case of Hsu Tzu-chiang—who was supported by the JRF and sentenced to death for kidnapping for ransom—was given a new lease on life after the Council of Grand Justices declared the two precedents applied in his case unconstitutional via Interpretation No. 582 in 2004. In May 2005, the Supreme Court remanded the case to the Taiwan High Court for retrial, and the first preparatory hearing was held in June, formally restarting the retrial proceedings.
   Brief Commentary
   After five years of rescue efforts, Hsu Tzu-chiang's case can finally be retried, and the related doubts finally have a chance to be clarified. The JRF has also assembled a pro bono defense team for Hsu Tzu-chiang, hoping to restore his innocence through a fair trial. Of course, we also hope that Taiwan's criminal human rights can make further progress, ensuring that cases similar to that of Hsu Tzu-chiang never happen again in the future.
   
   
10. Record-High Bail Set in Gary Hoo Case
    In the case involving Hu Hung-chiu who was suspected of embezzling funds from Pacific Electric Wire and Cable (PEWC), the Taipei District Court ruled in May 2005 to grant bail to Hu at 120 million NTD, setting a historical record. Over the next month or so, the Taipei District Prosecutors Office successively filed three appeals, all of which were successful, yet the Taipei District Court maintained its original ruling three times until the High Court sustained the fourth appeal, leading to Hu being re-detained. The tug-of-war between the court and the prosecutors also commanded a high level of public attention.
    Brief Commentary
    The record-high bail set in the Hu Hung-chiu case actually highlights certain problems within our nation's legal system, including whether major financial crimes should be reclassified as severe crimes and whether the pre-trial detention system in criminal procedure should be reviewed. Both issues warrant re-examination.