Review of the Second Half of FY 1999 and FY 2000 General Budget of the Ministry of Justice

1. With expenditures growing steadily—particularly in correctional services—the necessity of earnestly streamlining expenses has become even more crucial:

For this budget cycle, the Ministry of Justice's expenditures reached NT$11,398,536 thousand (over NT$11.39 billion), continuing an upward trend in budgeted amounts (Table 1). Correctional services account for a staggering NT$7,866,768 thousand (over NT$7.86 billion) of this total. Even when adjusted by two-thirds (accounting for the 1.5-year budget period factor), this figure still represents a 13.37% increase—or up to 29.85%—when compared to the previous fiscal year's budget of NT$4,625,718 thousand (over NT$4.62 billion) or the prior fiscal year's final accounts of NT$4,038,722 thousand (over NT$4.03 billion). Therefore, how to cut costs wherever possible without compromising administrative performance remains the utmost challenge for the future (Table 2).

Ministry of Justice Budget Allocations by Fiscal Year (Unit: NT$ thousand)

Fiscal Year	Budgeted Amount	Growth Rate Over Previous Year	Remarks
FY 1998	17063,090
FY 1999	19575,220	14.72%
FY 2000	29850,800	53.15%	Equivalent to an annualized growth rate of 4.9%

Breakdown of Correctional Services	Current Budget	Proportion of Correctional Services	Previous Year's Budget	Increase Rate
Prison Administration	5,478,231	69.63％	3,452,232	5.79％
Juvenile Correction	965,885	12.27％	360,169	78.78％
Re-education and Training	1,010,415	12.84％	615,066	9.51％
Drug Rehabilitation	412,237	5.24％	198,251	38.62％
Total	7,866,768	99.98％	4,625,718

2. Although prosecutorial services form the front line of crime investigation and prevention, funding for "prosecutorial administration" under the Ministry of Justice, grassroots prosecutors' offices, and "criminal case investigation and execution operations" at the Taipei District Prosecutors Office has decreased rather than increased. How can our capacity to combat crime be strengthened under these conditions?

Unit	Budget Item	Sub-item	Current Budget	2/3 Amount	Previous Year's Budget	Comparison
Ministry of Justice	Prosecutorial Administration	Funds for Prosecutorial Administration Operations	84,188	56,125	57,381	-2%
Taipei District Prosecutors Office	Prosecutors' Office	Operational Expenses for Criminal Case Investigation and Execution	25,693	17,128	17,688	-3%

3. Has there been any improvement in the quality of prosecutors' case handling? How can it be further enhanced?

In FY 1998, 2,880 written legal documents from prosecutors' offices were randomly sampled for review, resulting in 848 corrections for errors—an error rate of 29.44%. What prospects or methods for improvement exist for the future?

4. Apart from "suppression," are there effective preventive measures for combating corruption?

In FY 1996, the Ministry of Justice prosecuted 626 corruption cases involving 1,363 defendants; in FY 1997, 624 cases involving 1,317 defendants; in FY 1998, 575 cases involving 1,357 defendants; and in the first half of FY 1999, there were already 341 cases involving 810 defendants. With these figures remaining persistently high year after year, are there any preventive methods available?

5. From the perspective of operational rationalization, can certain functions be transferred out or manpower concentrated for more efficient utilization?

For instance, why should the Ministry of Justice be responsible for promoting arbitration services? Arbitration is inherently a dispute resolution mechanism and should perhaps fall under the jurisdiction of the Judicial Yuan. The same applies to township and city mediation.

Additionally, prosecutors traveled across various regions to deliver 1,700 lectures. Is such a heavy expenditure of manpower necessary? While legal education and crime prevention are undoubtedly important, prosecutors are already facing severe manpower shortages. Should they be burdened with such "side jobs"? The Ministry of Justice should instead focus primarily on policy planning and coordination.

6. With subsidy expenditures constantly increasing, are there rigorous controls and performance evaluations in place?

The Ministry of Justice subsidizes various organizations to the tune of NT$196,526 thousand (nearly NT$200 million) annually. What are the results? Are their performances rigorously evaluated? While this funding expenditure may not necessarily be avoidable, close attention must be paid to its effectiveness.

Unit	Budgeted Amount (Unit: NT$ thousand)
Various Township and City Mediation Committees	26,250
Organizations Conducting Drug Rehabilitation and Moral Education Training	3,000
Various Rehabilitation Protection Associations and Adult Probation Associations	77,932
Various Bar Associations and University Legal Aid Societies	3,644
Honorary Probation Officers Collaborative Associations	5,700
Crime Victims Associations, etc.	80,000

7. The promotion of legal services and legal aid lacks a comprehensive, systematic approach:

Currently, aside from subsidizing university law departments and bar associations, the Ministry of Justice lacks more effective measures, rendering current efforts rather limited in impact. Consideration should be given to the following:

1. Enacting government legislation to cover litigation costs for the impoverished, subsidizing attorney fees, or coordinating pro bono legal representation by attorneys (in civil cases).
2. Amending the Attorney Regulation Act to require attorneys to perform a set number of pro bono service hours, failing which a financial contribution must be paid, thereby institutionalizing the public-interest character of the legal profession. For details on this, please refer to page 46 of our publication, "Judicial Reform Blueprint".

8. Can the shortage of forensic pathologists be replenished promptly to realize scientific case-investigation methods?

In the second half of FY 1997, only five government-sponsored forensic pathology students remained, and the Institute of Forensic Medicine has yet to even appoint a director. What concrete measures does the Ministry of Justice have to recruit and build up forensic pathology personnel and truly implement scientific case investigations?

9. Other Budget Evaluation Opinions:

(1) Scientific case investigation requires an independent forensic institution

Explanation: Although the core mission of the Ministry of Justice centers on protecting the lawful and striking down the unlawful, the prosecutorial system—which is specifically tasked with this mission—lacks any hardware equipment or tools for scientific case investigation, nor has it established a complete set of standard operating procedures for scientific forensics. The Ministry of Justice's budget allocations fail to account for this, which constitutes a dereliction of duty. Recommendation: The Ministry of Justice should submit a proposal to the Legislative Yuan to enact legislation establishing an independent national forensic institution and detailing standard operating procedures for all types of forensic work, thereby preserving all data from the forensic process for external review. Furthermore, this institution should operate free from the command and supervision of prosecutors, police, and investigative agencies.