Decoding Tsai Ing-wen's Judicial Reform Speech

Image provided courtesy of Nisinsheep (蠢羊與奇怪生物), with special thanks.

When President Tsai Ing-wen mentioned judicial reform in her inaugural address, the audience responded with wave after wave of applause and cheers, once again demonstrating the public's impatience and helplessness regarding the judiciary, and their eager anticipation for a solution. The address offered a "solution" of fewer than three hundred words, which is somewhat elusive and warrants further analysis.

First, convening a National Conference on Judicial Reform. This is President Tsai's first clear commitment to judicial reform: convening a judicial reform conference at the presidential level, and even specifically scheduling it for October. If we consider why the 1999 "National Judicial Reform Conference" failed, it can perhaps be attributed to the political leadership at the time being unwilling to bring in political energy at the presidential level to negotiate and resolve disputes between the branches of government. The judicial policies maintained by each branch from their own institutional perspectives often mutually hindered one another, leading to intractable deadlocks.

In this regard, if Tsai can take concrete responsibility in her capacity as president, it can be considered the first successful step. However, it must still be noted that a two- or three-day national conference, while capable of mobilizing public attention and energy, is insufficient for discussing deeply rooted judicial issues. Establishing a standing mechanism after the plenary session is the only steady, practical, and responsible reform action, ensuring the National Conference on Judicial Reform does not become merely a ceremonial, firework-like spectacle.

Second, real public participation and the integration of social forces. Whether the Kuomintang or the Democratic Progressive Party, both have convened quite a few "national-level conferences." Meetings of this kind aimed at "listening to the voices of the people" are most criticized for insufficient representation—perhaps deliberate or due to temporal and spatial limitations, resulting in genuine stakeholders being unable to attend; or policies having been predetermined, with citizens invited merely to endorse them; or participants simply invited to "express their own views" without any follow-up. These all reflect a "lack of sincerity" or "poor technical execution" in government meetings.

Fortunately, under the framework of "open government," an increasing number of government bureaucrats are becoming more willing to listen to—and even invite—diverse opinions from all sectors during the policymaking process. Furthermore, with the development of internet tools, methods such as live webcasts, real-time online responses, the pre- and post-event disclosure of information, and the collection of feedback allow ordinary citizens and civil society groups to attend meetings in a timely manner and participate at any time, expressing their opinions on issues that concern and affect them. Only through the assistance of the internet and technology can we truly maximize genuine public participation and bring the vitality and creativity of Taiwanese society into the judicial reform conferences.

Third, shifting away from a judiciary solely run by legal professionals and judicial officers toward a reform involving universal public participation. This final point actually builds upon the second. Through internet technology, the process of deliberating judicial policies will be completely transparent and open, truly allowing public participation so that opinions are not solely monopolized by legal professionals. On one hand, this can break through the blind spots of legal professionals' habitual thinking; on the other hand, because the participatory process is open and deliberation is transparent, once a consensus is formed, resistance to pushing forward policies can also be effectively reduced.

The analysis above represents our optimistic vision for Tsai Ing-wen. Whether it can become a reality depends in large part on whether mechanisms can be established and resistance reduced to carry out subsequent resolutions. The people of Taiwan have waited far too long for the judiciary to "grow up," and we hope this marks the beginning of making that dream come true.