Statement by the Judicial Reform Foundation Regarding the Judicial Yuan's Approval of the Proposal to Relieve Presiding Judges of Their Concurrent Administrative Duties

The Personnel Review Committee of the Judicial Yuan passed a proposal yesterday to relieve 22 first- and second-instance presiding judges of their concurrent administrative duties, 16 of whom were relieved on the grounds of term expiration and unsuitability for reappointment. The Judicial Reform Foundation welcomes this decision, stating that it will help vitalize future personnel assignments for presiding judges and facilitate the transmission of adjudication experience.

Additionally, among the 22 presiding judges relieved of their concurrent duties, six voluntarily stepped down from their positions. The Judicial Reform Foundation believes this should be encouraged, as such a practice sets a positive example for the establishment of a personnel system for presiding judges.

Regarding the selection of court presiding judges, Article 11 of the draft Judges Act explicitly provides that the term of office for presiding judges in courts at or below the High Court level shall be three years, with one consecutive reappointment permitted. Furthermore, before a presiding judge's term expires and reappointment is considered, the Judicial Yuan shall solicit the opinions of judges who have served in the same court as that presiding judge; the regulations governing the reassignment of presiding judges shall be formulated by the Judicial Yuan. However, the draft Judges Act has long failed to pass, meaning yesterday's decision to relieve presiding judges of their concurrent duties still resulted from non-systemic operations and caused ongoing controversy. In response, the Judicial Reform Foundation hopes that the draft Judges Act will be passed as soon as possible to establish institutionalized personnel practices for judges at an early date.