Judicial Reform Attorney Representatives Represent Generational Injustice

The Office of the President convened the National Conference on Judicial Reform, with the Preparatory Committee planning for 5 working groups, each allocated two attorney seats. One seat is elected by the Taiwan Bar Association (TWBA), while the other is selected by the Preparatory Committee from nominations solicited from various sectors. However, the TWBA's handling of the election and nomination of attorney representatives this year clearly reveals its long-standing ailments.

Restrictions on candidate qualifications amount to generational injustice: According to its internal regulations, the TWBA held the election for attorney representatives to the National Conference on Judicial Reform by having local bar associations nominate candidates, followed by a postal vote conducted by the TWBA. The 5 candidates with the highest number of votes were elected (with 1 alternate subsequently added). However, those "who have practiced law for less than 10 years" were disqualified from running. Although attorneys born in the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s actually make up the majority of all practicing attorneys, the majority of them have practiced for less than 10 years and were thus stripped of their right to run from the very beginning.

Furthermore, granting local bar associations the nomination power is not open to all attorneys either; candidates nominated by local bar associations have mostly served in key positions such as presidents of local bar associations or the TWBA. The position of attorney representative has thus become tied to bar association experience, forming an "inner circle" election and serving as the final medal pursued by senior figures before their retirement. Consequently, the 13 candidates running in this election were on the older side, with the youngest already 48 years old. Even attorneys born in the early 1970s with 10 years of practice experience (the most senior currently being 46 years old) could not make the candidate list.

Young Attorneys Are "Made Absent"

The electoral process and results prioritize might above all else: The election bulletin only listed basic personal information such as candidate ballot numbers, names, and educational/professional backgrounds, while the platform column was omitted entirely. Except for a very few candidates with reformist ideals who actively published their platforms, local bar associations' letters urging members to vote still boiled down to mobilizing organized votes, regional votes, and personal-favor votes. A certain senior figure from central Taiwan even mobilized vote allocation based on "surnames"! Ultimately, aside from reformist candidates who demonstrated the appeal to attract votes, whether one was elected largely reflected the candidates' organizational strength. The senior figure who initiated the vote allocation also successfully snatched the victory medal as desired, repeatedly demonstrating that attorney representative elections care only about might rather than ideals! 

Nominated candidates are merely picked from within the "inner circle": The 5 attorneys recommended by the TWBA for selection by the Preparatory Committee were nominated by the TWBA's directors and supervisors, and then chosen by 46 directors and supervisors through a one-person-one-vote meeting. Yet among the 5 chosen through the aforementioned procedure, the youngest is already 49 years old, and almost all of them have previously run for attorney representative in past Judges Selection Committees or Evaluation Committees. This clearly shows that the TWBA is still searching for people within its "inner circle"; moreover, it is estimated that none of them received more than 10 votes. One must ask: how can they represent the entire legal community? 

Looking back at the list of 20 attorney representatives at the 1999 National Judicial Reform Conference, the youngest was 36 years old, there were 6 attorneys under 40, and representatives under 50 made up the majority overall. This shows that the reform back then placed its hopes on the young and vigorous. Today, the TWBA's electoral system design everywhere exhibits seniority discrimination and generational injustice. An "inner circle" election that prioritizes might only serves to shrink the scope of attorney representative elections. Because its 5 recommended attorneys were not selected, the TWBA questioned whether there was a black-box operation, showing no self-awareness of its own chronic ailments. The younger generation of the legal community has thus been collectively absented and silenced in the National Conference on Judicial Reform. The reform of the bar association system is also a crucial link in judicial reform; the entire unjust status quo awaits young attorneys to awaken and shatter it!