A Critical Moment for Judicial Reform—The Retrial of the Su Chien-ho Case as a Touchstone for the New Criminal Procedure System

Although the widely followed retrial of Su Chien-ho and two others resulted in an acquittal by the High Court on January 13 of this year (2003), the prosecutor from the Taiwan High Prosecutors Office appealed the decision. Consequently, the Supreme Court revoked the original retrial judgment on August 8 and remanded the case for retrial, with the first hearing held today (October 27) in the First Courtroom of the High Court.

Among the reasons cited by the Supreme Court for revoking the original retrial judgment, conflicting confessions among the co-defendants remained the primary basis, while the lack of evidence implicating the three men and favorable eyewitness testimony were ignored. Following the official implementation of the new criminal procedure system on September 1 of this year, we earnestly hope that the court will uphold the spirit of judicial fairness and objectivity, refrain from arbitrarily making public statements that influence public perception and create antagonism between the defendants and the victims' families, and adhere to the principles of the new criminal procedure system—such as the presumption of innocence and strict rules of evidence—during the trial proceedings to uphold judicial justice, eradicate wrongful convictions, and protect human rights.

To this end, civil society organizations that have long monitored this case (the Judicial Reform Foundation, the Taiwan Association for Human Rights, and the Humanistic Education Foundation) have specially invited Professor Ts'ai Tun-ming to serve as the convener, forming a "Professional Court Observation Mission" composed of law professors from various universities. From the professional standpoint of legal scholars, this mission will observe, record, and supervise whether the trial quality of this case and the conduct of the court, the prosecution, and the defense conform to the spirit of the new criminal procedure system.

Finally, the supporting organizations reiterate that while the remand for retrial is discouraging, we still sincerely hope that the remanded first retrial proceedings will embody the spirit of the new criminal procedure system, conducting a serious, fair, and objective trial. This will not only make the case a touchstone for the new criminal procedure system but also serve as a historical testimony to elevating judicial quality and realizing justice in individual cases.

Professional Court Observation Mission for the Remanded Retrial of the Su Chien-ho Case

Convener

Ts'ai Tun-ming, Professor, Department of Law, National Taiwan University

Members

Ho Lai-chieh, Professor, Department of Law, National Chengchi University
Wu Chih-kuang, Professor, Department of Law, Fu Jen Catholic University
Wu Hao-jen, Professor, Department of Law, Fu Jen Catholic University
Li Nien-chu, Professor, Department of Law, Soochow University
Li Mao-sheng, Professor, Department of Law, National Taiwan University
Ch'en I-ch'ien, Professor, Department of Law, Shih Hsin University
Cheng Yu-wei, Professor, Department of Industrial Economics, National Central University
Liu Ching-yi, Professor, Department of Industrial Economics, National Central University
Chan Wen-kai, Professor, Department of Law, Shih Hsin University
Wei Ch'ien-feng, Professor, Department of Law, Soochow University

To be continued