Doxxing, Public Trials, and Witch Hunts—Witnessing the Stories of Victims of Violations of Non-Publicity of Investigation?

Growing up, television news broadcasts frequently featured reports on various types of criminal cases. Thanks to rapid technological advances, video and audio quality have also improved. Newspaper coverage has become richer, and with the addition of more real-time, content-diverse online media, information regarding crimes, investigation processes, and suspects is laid bare before the world.

In the past, I too thought this was completely fine, and never imagined it could ruin an innocent person's life—until I witnessed such a tragedy firsthand at the JRF.

Lu Ping-hung—hearing this name instantly brings to mind the shocking 2013 Bali Double Homicide Case. The image of him being led away in handcuffs by police remains vivid in my mind. Later, when prosecutors issued a non-prosecution disposition, it gave me another jolt, because I knew that even if the non-prosecution disposition gave him substantive justice, the label of "murderer" branded upon him would probably be difficult to wash away.

Another victim, Kuo Mei-lan, had aspired to be a journalist since junior high school. She later successfully became a Central News Agency correspondent stationed in China, specializing in cross-strait news. However, she was hit like a bolt from the blue when she was falsely accused of being a Communist spy. Amid extensive media coverage, she lost the journalism work she loved. Even though it was ultimately investigated and found to be a completely mistaken case resulting in a non-prosecution disposition, to this day, not a single media outlet is willing to hire her full-time.

My connection with them stems from the JRF's establishment of the Non-Publicity of Investigation Project, where we invited two victims persecuted by "very public investigations" to share their experiences. From their eyes and words, which revealed boundless resilience alongside the deepest helplessness, I finally understood that a dysfunctional principle of non-publicity of investigation is precisely why some people still believe Lu Ping-hung is a "cold-blooded murderer" and Kuo Mei-lan a "traitor who sold out her country." As Lu Ping-hung expressed: "Is it in the past? It's still here..."

Paragraph 1, Article 245 of the Code of Criminal Procedure shall provide that: "A prosecutorial investigation shall not be made public." These mere six words in black and white declare the obligation of investigative authorities not to disclose information obtained during investigations. This is meant to protect the privacy of criminal suspects, uphold the principle of presumption of innocence, and secure the right to a fair trial. Yet, it is like a ghost; everyone can rattle it off and vividly describe it, but no one has ever actually seen it. That provision seems to mock the suffering of victims, appearing all the more ironic.

The JRF established the Non-Publicity of Investigation Project in the hope of finding solutions for this previously neglected issue. We will accept public complaints via a dedicated hotline, organize a team of attorneys to assist citizens with state compensation lawsuits, and continue our monitoring and social advocacy activities. We hope there will never be another victim whose life is ruined by violations of the non-publicity of investigation. After all, you and I could be the next Lu Ping-hung or Kuo Mei-lan; just like them, before they "became famous," they were just as ordinary as you and me. The Non-Publicity of Investigation Project needs your support.