Response to the Judicial Yuan's Press Release of May 4

The Judicial Yuan's press release on May 4 responding to the statement on "interfering with the external disciplinary mechanism" is just the same old tune with nothing new. We urge the Judicial Yuan to stop evading and answer the following questions:

1. Why could the Judicial Yuan's press release on May 1 make factual determinations and express legal opinions regarding a sub judice case?
2. Before issuing the press release on May 1, did the Judicial Yuan receive any requests regarding the specific case? If so, was the response method simply to forgo an investigation and directly issue a press release that interferes with the evaluation?
3. Regarding the widespread lack of audio recording during court sessions for consumer debt clearance cases, what concrete response measures does the Judicial Yuan have?
4. Regarding the abnormal withdrawal situations in consumer debt clearance cases at the Taichung District Court, is the Judicial Yuan willing to conduct a comprehensive self-regulatory investigation?

Press Contact
Kao Jung-chih, Attorney-at-Law / Executive Director, Judicial Reform Foundation — 02-2523-1178