中文｜EN
Donate Now
Recruitment | Attorney Volunteers for the State Compensation Law Amendment Working Group

Recruitment | Attorney Volunteers for the State Compensation Law Amendment Working Group

Last edited: 2026-08-30

Judicial Reform Foundation

Background

On September 2, 2021, the Executive Yuan approved draft amendments to the State Compensation Law prepared by the Ministry of Justice and submitted them to the Legislative Yuan for deliberation. The current law contains only 17 articles and is not divided into chapters; the Executive Yuan draft expands it to 43 articles organized into four chapters: "General Provisions," "Compensation Procedure," "Recourse Procedure," and "Supplementary Provisions." The proposed overhaul is extensive and could have far-reaching effects on individual rights, government operations, and the structure of state liability.

The draft immediately prompted substantial public discussion. Within a short time, more than a dozen experts, scholars, and practitioners had published commentary (see the Appendix). The most heavily debated issue is whether current Article 13 should be repealed or amended. Other questions also require further discussion and consensus-building, including:

  • [Advance Payment of Litigation Costs]The draft retains the current requirement that people seeking state compensation prepay court costs under the Code of Civil Procedure. The practical extent to which those costs deter or obstruct state-compensation claims requires closer examination.
  • [Government Recourse Against Judges and Prosecutors]The draft provides that when state-compensation liability results from a judge's or prosecutor's "gross negligence," the government shall seek recourse against that person. It is necessary to consider whether this rule is consistent with the spirit of the Universal Charter of the Judge.

To ensure that amendments to the State Compensation Law reflect people's actual needs, and that government agencies use state-compensation cases as an opportunity for systematic institutional review and improvement, the JRF plans to establish a working group on the proposed amendments. The group will examine both the Executive Yuan draft and practical problems arising in existing state-compensation cases, synthesize views from different sectors, and prepare a civil-society draft or recommendations.

We therefore warmly invite attorneys to join this research and legislative effort as partners. We hope you will participate in the State Compensation Law Amendment Working Group and help build another progressive force for judicial reform in Taiwan.

Working Group Objectives
1. Prepare a civil-society draft of amendments to the State Compensation Law.
2. Conduct legislative advocacy with the goal of securing passage of the civil-society proposals in the Legislative Yuan.

Working Group Convener
Chiang Jung-Hsiang, Attorney-at-Law (Standing Executive Committee Member, Judicial Reform Foundation)

Online Registration >

Time

Monday, October 18, 7:00-9:00 p.m.

※ If you are interested in joining the working group but cannot attend at the above time, please still submit your information through the registration link. The JRF will send you the agenda and meeting minutes and invite you to subsequent meetings. You are also welcome to provide written comments, relevant cases, or other useful materials in advance for discussion.

Location

JRF Main Conference Room (7F., No. 3, Ln. 90, Songjiang Rd., Zhongshan Dist., Taipei City)
※ If the meeting location changes, a separate notice will be provided.

Agenda

Time Agenda Speaker
19:00-19:10 Welcome and Introduction by the Convener Attorney Chiang Jung-Hsiang
19:10-19:30 Secretariat Report Attorney Lu Cheng-Yen (Deputy Director, Legal Policy Department, JRF)
19:30-20:50 Discussion:
General Provisions (Articles 1-18)
Compensation Procedure (Articles 19-36)
Recourse Procedure (Articles 37-38)

The discussion will first address the overall direction of the amendments. After a preliminary consensus emerges, the group will consider the following issues in turn:

  1. Are the proposed requirements for state-compensation liability arising from acts of judges and prosecutors (Article 5) appropriate?
  2. Should citizen judges and expert lay judges serving in the Disciplinary Chamber of the Judiciary be treated as "judges" for purposes of the provision?
  3. Is it appropriate to require people seeking state compensation to prepay court costs under the Code of Civil Procedure?
  4. Is it appropriate for the liable compensating authority to have a right of recourse against judges and prosecutors for "gross negligence" (Article 7, Paragraph 1)?
  5. Is it appropriate that recourse against organizations or individuals entrusted to exercise public authority is not limited to cases of "gross negligence" (Article 8, Paragraph 1)?
  6. Are the draft provisions governing exercise of recourse by the liable compensating authority sufficient (Article 7)? Should there be additional rules for agencies, and their superior agencies, that fail to exercise recourse? Are the provisions allowing recourse to be waived appropriate?
  7. Are the draft's method and procedure for identifying the liable compensating authority in cases involving defects in the management of public facilities appropriate (Article 7)?
  8. Other Issues

20:50-21:00

 Confirm Research Assignments and the Date of the Next Meeting

※ The agenda and discussion topics are provisional. Detailed reports and discussion materials will be circulated by email before the meeting. In addition to the listed items, participating attorneys are warmly invited to suggest further issues and provide comments.

Appendix: Published Commentary

This article is an AI-generated translation of the original Chinese text. In the event of any discrepancy, the Chinese version shall prevail.

Back to News