President Tsai Ing-wen's Judicial Reform Record After Two Years in Office: A Statement by the Judicial Reform Foundation

Photo Source / Tsai Ing-wen Official Facebook Page

President Tsai Ing-wen's convening of the National White Paper on Judicial Reform in her first year in office to respond to the public's demands is worthy of affirmation. Following the conclusion of the national conference last year, the President made important commitments regarding the subsequent judicial reform: "communication and dialogue" and "implementation."

The President stated: "What can be reformed should be done immediately without hesitation; for matters that require time to proceed step by step, clearly explain the steps and timeline; for matters with difficulties, do not be afraid to explain to society and engage in dialogue."

Therefore, after the conclusion of the national conference, the civil sector and the government continued their dialogue, and officials promised information transparency by setting up the "Judicial Reform Progress Tracking Information Platform" website. The Judicial Yuan has invested in drafting bills, including the draft pyramid litigation system, the draft Labor Incident Act, the draft Citizen Judges Act, and the drafts of the Grand Chamber and the Constitutional Court Procedure Act. Unfortunately, the legislative progress has been slow, prior communication was insufficient, and the public is filled with many doubts regarding these bills. Meanwhile, the Ministry of Justice has been unenthusiastic about promoting reform, with little to show other than abolishing prosecutors' receipt of case-handling bonuses and changing agency signboards.

Examining President Tsai's judicial reform record after two years in office, "the government is moving, but the people feel nothing." The reason for this is that ordinary citizens care about the huge pain caused by rights violations, including the ouster of incompetent judges and prosecutors, the redress of wrongful convictions, the reform of the prosecutorial system, and adherence to the principle of non-publicity of investigations. However, the government lacks sufficient resolve and determination in handling these issues, and public satisfaction with judicial reform remains low.

Evaluation and Amendment of Laws Nowhere in Sight     Redress of Wrongful Convictions Handled Perfunctorily

First, the evaluation system under the Judges Act has been in implementation for six years. Because individuals are not allowed to directly request evaluations, and the statute of limitations is short, the number of judges and prosecutors ousted over the past six years can be counted on one hand. Had it not been for the sexual harassment case involving Judge Ch'en Hung-pin, which exposed the conniving and mutually protective culture within the judicial circle that drove citizens beyond their tolerance limit, the Judicial Yuan would not have delayed until recently to propose amendments in an attempt to restore confidence, yet when the legislation will pass remains completely uncertain.

As for the work of redressing wrongful convictions, the Ministry of Justice established the "Review Committee for Finalized Convictions" to provide relief for wrongful convictions in June of last year; however, when legislators made inquiries in April of this year, it was discovered that only eight cases had been accepted, and over half of those cases were directly dismissed on procedural grounds. Even wrongful convictions identified by Control Yuan members were dismissed for lacking eligibility. The Ministry of Justice has been criticized for perfunctory perusal.

Prosecutorial Rotation is Empty Talk     Inconsistent Standards for Non-Publicity of Investigations

As for personnel reforms in the prosecutorial system to eliminate lobbying and political interference, although the Ministry of Justice announced the "Tier-1 and Tier-2 Prosecutor Rotation Mechanism," current Tier-2 prosecutors are not required at all to participate in the rotation, let alone break the existing promotion ladder. The Ministry of Justice has been criticized for presenting an ineffective plan that even sparked a backlash from grassroots personnel.

Furthermore, while the government on the one hand declares strict investigation into police and prosecutors violating the principle of non-publicity of investigations and causing human rights violations, the National Police Agency under the Ministry of Interior is on the other hand taking the lead in violating non-publicity by requiring grassroots police officers to produce their own videos, publicly disclosing investigative processes and parties' information, and using extreme ridicule of the parties in the videos to beautify the police image, thereby creating trial by media and severely undermining the presumption of innocence.

Institutional Changes Should Be Piloted     Supplemented by Scientific Analysis

Aside from the aforementioned judicial issues of concern to the public, there is also a fundamental reform involving the criminal trial system: the system of public participation in trials.

Whether Taiwan is truly suited for a jury system or a lay participation system was not concluded at the national conference. The Judicial Yuan has forcefully promoted the lay participation system and drafted the "Citizen Judges Act," completely abandoning the participation of experts and scholars who support the jury system, thus losing an important opportunity for dialogue. After civil society took to the streets in protest, the Judicial Yuan attempted to respond to criticism using "official polls." However, doubts regarding the system—especially the substantive issue of whether professional judges influence lay judges and how—can only be learned through pilot runs and observation and analysis using scientific methods, rather than irresponsibly using polls to endorse a policy.

Formulate Reform Priorities     Continue Dialogue and Communication with Civil Society

The aforementioned issues are only a small part of the reforms; judicial problems are deeply entrenched, and matters involving the jurisdiction of cross-branch ministries and departments are even more difficult. Reform takes time, but time is not on the President's side. A single website reveals that the government's current judicial reform progress is slow and its priorities are confused. We suggest that the President promptly invite relevant judicial and executive branches to formulate reform priorities, plan short-, medium-, and long-term programs, with the most urgent priorities including the judicial issues citizens care about most and the resolutions of the national conference that can be implemented immediately without legislative amendment. In addition, we must leverage the strength of civil society, continue communication and dialogue, candidly respond to doubts, and work together to advance reform.

Judicial reform is one of the few reforms where President Tsai can easily gain points with a little effort; let us not allow the boos at the end of her term to outweigh the applause at her inauguration.

Press Contact

Ch'en Yü-fan, Attorney-at-Law / Executive Director, Judicial Reform Foundation