Rule of Law Education is Not That Difficult! The Constitutional Court Should Allow Electronic Media Broadcasting

Any progressive nation holds an unshakable and extremely high respect for its national constitution. There are two reasons for this: first, the constitution guarantees fundamental human rights such as people's lives, freedom, property, and speech; second, the people understand that the values and meanings represented by the law only truly emerge when everyone knows how to obey the law. When national public opinion was at a fever pitch, discussing the legality and constitutionality of the 'Special Committee Statute for Truth Investigation of the March 19 Shooting Incident,' everyone eagerly anticipated the Constitutional Court oral arguments presided over by the impartial Grand Justices of the Judicial Yuan, which were held today. With only 64 seats available for these oral arguments—32 for the general public and 32 for the media—electronic media was uniquely barred from live broadcasting, falling just short of success in promoting rule-of-law education.

In fact, the three public debates held by the Grand Justices for the review of the 'urgent disposition' and the constitutionality of the 'March 19 Statute' (on October 14, 27, and 29) serve as prime material for rule-of-law education. Given the Grand Justices' careful deliberation regarding these public oral arguments and the fact that court was in session for the first time in six years, we believe this rare opportunity for rule-of-law education should be seized. Under conditions that do not disrupt courtroom order, live electronic media broadcasting should be permitted to broaden the legal horizons of the public, bringing citizens closer to our nation's fundamental law so they can further understand their own rights and experience what constitutional protection for the people truly entails.

Because ordinary courts are restricted by Article 90 of the Court Organization Act and cannot permit live broadcasting, Article 33 of the Act Governing the Adjudication of Cases by the Grand Justices of the Judicial Yuan merely stipulates that procedures in the Constitutional Court shall 'mutatis mutandis apply' the Court Organization Act. Therefore, the Council of Grand Justices possesses greater room for formulation and should be able to decide to permit broadcasting.

Is rule-of-law education for the general public really that difficult? If we can seize this opportunity to open this debate to electronic media broadcasting, allowing the broad masses to gain a deeper understanding of the intent and spirit of the Constitution, it would be an optimal moment to set a precedent.

Today's Constitutional Court session failed to allow media broadcasting as we previously appealed. However, we have heard that the Judicial Yuan intends to permit broadcasting for the subsequent debate sessions on the 27th and 29th. We sincerely hope this idea becomes a reality. If this can thereby elevate the legal awareness of the entire citizenry, then the social costs expended thus far for the March 19 shooting case will not have been a complete loss.