[Alliance Statement] Regarding the Presidential Nomination of Hsieh Wen-ting as Grand Justice and President of the Judicial Yuan, and Lin Chin-fang as Grand Justice and Vice President

Regarding President Tsai Ing-wen's nomination of Hsieh Wen-ting as Grand Justice and President of the Judicial Yuan, and Lin Chin-fang as Grand Justice and Vice President, and the submission of the official document to the Legislative Yuan for consent, the Grand Justice Selection Civic Watchdog Alliance issues the following statement:

1. 1. Submitting the official document immediately after the nomination compresses the schedule, forces the legislature to accept it wholesale, and prevents public oversight:
   
   1. While the public naturally hopes for the personnel of the new President and Vice President of the Judicial Yuan to be finalized as soon as possible to facilitate the early initiation of judicial reform, substantive review of Grand Justice nominees requires that the Legislative Yuan have sufficient time and comprehensive content to schedule the review process while also providing an opportunity for public scrutiny.
   2. However, the President has requested the Legislative Yuan to exercise its consent power regarding the Grand Justice nominations. Although the official document has been submitted to the Legislative Yuan, it was sent without the nominees' most basic relevant information, such as educational background, career history, publications, property, taxation, and vision and plans for the judiciary, leaving the legislature and the public unable to effectively oversee and review the nominations.
   3. Furthermore, as the current legislative session is about to end, it is rumored that the Democratic Progressive Party caucus will leverage its majority advantage to forcefully pass the nominations through a vote in a short period. If this is true, the Alliance condemns it severely! If this is yet another instance of a majority advantage and superficial review, how does the new government differ from the old government despised by the people? Let alone that the review of nominations for the President and Vice President of the Judicial Yuan—who represent the judicial power—is treated as such child's play!
   4. At the same time, the Alliance also calls upon the legislative branch to conduct a substantive and rigorous review rather than being reduced to a rubber stamp for the executive branch. In particular, the consensus to change the exercise of consent power to a roll-call vote means that individual legislators must take political responsibility for their own judgments. To follow only party lines without public opinion not only demeans the judicial power but also tramples upon one's own legislative power.
2. 2. The suitability of the President and Vice President is highly problematic:
   
   1. The judicial reform policies proposed by President Tsai Ing-wen are quite forward-looking and visionary in their planning direction. Hsieh Wen-ting and Lin Chin-fang's past operational styles have been conservative; one must ask how they can be expected to carry out sweeping reforms?
   2. When Hsieh Wen-ting participated in the 1999 National Judicial Reform Conference, he was unable to break free from institutional parochialism in his remarks, which conflicted with the stance held by the Judicial Yuan. One must ask how he would mediate and handle such situations if he serves as President? Furthermore, having previously served as Secretary-General of the Judicial Yuan, if there were no concrete judicial reform actions taken back then, how can we expect any now?
   3. Although Lin Chin-fang would be the first female Vice President nominated, having a biological female serve as Vice President does not equate to gender equality; gender consciousness is the key. During her tenure as Secretary-General, disregarding the opposition from the public and the legal profession, she sacrificed the people's right to obtain court recording discs, repeatedly displaying a tough and conservative stance during amendment seminars. How can such a style change overnight? How can it transform into the style required by a National Judicial Conference—one of patiently listening to public opinion and actively communicating and dialoguing with the people? Moreover, having strongly pushed for the "citizen participation system" (觀審制) while serving as Secretary-General and having defended it in the Legislative Yuan, her stance actually contradicts President Tsai Ing-wen's rejection of the citizen participation system. If her policy stance changes, how can she justify it? One must remember that her primary office is that of a Grand Justice, with the Vice Presidency being concurrently held. How will she face criticisms regarding the inconsistency of her values and beliefs over time?
3. 3. The public holds high expectations for the new government. However, in the face of the aforementioned widespread public skepticism, the Alliance earnestly appeals that since there are still five Grand Justice nominations to be made this year, the President's Office's nomination process should be open and transparent. The Alliance reiterates that legislators from the Democratic Progressive Party, the Kuomintang, and the New Power Party all stated during the press conference held by the Alliance on May 9 that they would conduct a strict substantive review of the Grand Justice nominees, with the DPP and the New Power Party even proposing legislative amendments to that end. The Alliance calls upon the Legislative Yuan to cast aside the habits of the old government, strictly and substantively review the Grand Justice personnel, and spare the nation's citizens from further disappointment with the legislature, allowing them to experience a brand-new review process worthy of the honorable status of Grand Justices who also serve as President and Vice President of the Judicial Yuan.
   

Convener, Grand Justice Selection Civic Watchdog Alliance

Professor Ch'ü Hai-yüan
Spokesperson Attorney Kao Jung-chih

Alliance Members

Taipei Society  (澄社)
Taiwan Law Association
Taiwan Association for Human Rights
Citizen Congress Watch

Taiwan Innocence Project

Taiwan Democracy Watch
Taiwan Awakening Foundation
Judicial Reform Foundation

Press Contact

Judicial Reform Foundation Executive Director, Attorney Kao Jung-chih 02-2523-1178