Justice and Its Cost

The new judicial system set to take effect on September 1st—adopting the adversarial system in criminal procedure—has prompted many legal professionals to speak out. Some argue that the reform will infringe upon the rights and interests of the people, citing that impoverished individuals will no longer be able to afford lawsuits and judicial personnel will be overburdened. At the same time, reformists have voiced support for the new system. With conflicting arguments from both sides, the general public is left confused and struggling to understand the situation.

It is worth noting, however, that no one opposes the intent and reform direction of the new system. This proves that judicial reform is moving in the right direction, albeit with institutional innovation outpacing the awakening of minds. The mindset of many legal professionals remains trapped in the past bureaucratic era; naturally, when faced with overwhelming institutional revisions, they can only complain and resist, even waving the banner of "infringement on people's rights and interests" to reject the calls for reform.

As a staff member of a judicial reform organization who has long observed judicial problems, past judicial procedures were perfunctory, with people often appealing repeatedly, yet failing to obtain a satisfactory result even after three to five years of litigation—meaning the judiciary could naturally not gain the public's trust. Let alone the impact of numerous criminal miscarriage of justice cases on the parties involved, which entails not only the loss of family property and assets, but violations of life and liberty. The promotion of various new judicial systems in recent years is essentially aimed at solving the aforementioned problems. On the one hand, it establishes comprehensive litigation procedures, enabling people to obtain satisfactory results as much as possible in the first and second instances without the need for endless appeals; on the other hand, it puts human rights concepts into practice within procedures, ensuring that the "presumption of innocence" is no longer merely a slogan.

The implementation of any new system requires not only supporting measures, but more importantly, the communication of concepts. People are often excluded from the law, a situation originating from the long-standing deficiency in legal education. Even with a television program reaching a 15% viewership rating, many still cannot tell the difference between a prosecutor's investigation and a judge's trial procedure, so it is only natural that the public views going to court with dread and trepidation. Therefore, when the implementation of the new criminal procedure system directly affects people's rights and interests, it is only through the realization of legal education that the public can understand and value their own rights in daily life, and make good use of social resources to reduce the reliance on litigation as a way to solve problems.

As for concerns that the implementation of the new system will create the problem of "judicial new poverty," this should be addressed by fully implementing the "legal aid" system to solve the problem of some people being unable to afford litigation costs—a task that the Judicial Reform Foundation has consistently strived to promote. We therefore take this opportunity to call upon the honorable members of the Legislative Yuan to swiftly pass the Legal Aid Act, which has already passed its second reading, so that both the prosecution and the defense in litigation can achieve equality of arms in the courtroom.

Challenging and pursuing justice inherently requires paying a price. The phenomenon of shoddy judgments resulting from a historically underfunded judicial sector is about to change. It is hoped that institutional reform will drive reflection and responsiveness among legal professionals, and we also look forward to legal professionals across party lines joining hands to create a judicial environment trusted by the people.

※ Published in: China Times