Early Unboxing of the Lay Assessor System｜Making "Lay Assessor" a Language Everyone Can Understand ── An Interview with a Simulated Lay Assessor

Flooded with multiple pieces of information such as documentary evidence and cross-examination arguments during the trial, lay assessors might find themselves caught between reading documents and listening to testimonies. Although the presiding judge repeatedly reminded the lay assessors that their primary focus should be on listening to the on-site defense testimonies rather than constantly looking at the documents, for Kai-Yang—who is engaged in research and expects to grasp more comprehensive information—if lay assessors cannot clearly understand the evidence or the process behind the trial and can only observe the immediate proceedings in court, they might rely solely on personal subjective thoughts to make judgments, potentially raising the risk of misjudgment. Moreover, under the mechanism of free evaluation of evidence, could the subjective consciousness of lay assessors, as well as performances by the defendant or plaintiff during the trial that create scenarios inconsistent with the actual case, generate the danger of influencing the verdict?

Additionally, during the questioning segment for lay assessors, Kai-Yang observed that no one asked questions at first, and everyone looked at each other hesitantly. The presiding judge guided them on what kind of questions they could ask—offering prompting hints rather than directly telling them what to do—and encouraged them by saying, "You can ask any kind of question." However, as a legal novice, Kai-Yang inevitably fell into an anxious process of self-censorship, wondering, "What makes a good question?" and "Which questions are relevant to the case and which are not?" Yet, these personal and unique questions that lay assessors wish to ask might be critical keys to their own contemplation and piecing together the overall picture of the case. Therefore, how to make lay assessors feel at ease and willing to ask questions may also be an important issue that the lay assessor system must confront.

Next, entering the verdict-reaching procedure, lay assessors must decide based on the "circumstances": 1. Whether the defendant is guilty; 2. What penalty should be imposed on the defendant? In this simulated drunk-driving involuntary manslaughter case, because the defendant pleaded guilty in court, discussion was limited to sentencing regarding the first charge. For the second charge, the lay assessors expressed a wider range of opinions, such as: whether the detailed procedures of the judgment establish the defendant's guilt; whether the party was sober or intoxicated at the time; the motive for the crime; the attitude after the crime; or the personal and family life conditions stated by the party. In addition, lay assessors would also generate sympathetic feelings triggered by the scenarios in the video, leading them to ponder questions such as: the victim is very pitiful, or the defendant was in a bad mood and drove drunk due to long-term domestic violence, or the defendant's statements all show a lack of intent. Combining these diverse thoughts and emotional feelings sparked a heated debate among the lay assessors over whether the defendant's reasons were sufficient to offset the punishment, whether this crime truly needed to be established, or whether the sentence should be reduced. After deliberation, the vote for the second charge ended in a 3-3 tie among the six lay assessors; only after the professional judge's vote was added did it achieve a two-thirds majority to pass a guilty verdict.

As for determining the sentence, individual slips of paper were distributed. Based on the statutory penalty range for the offense, each lay assessor wrote down the length of the sentence they considered reasonable. In this case, the penalty for drunk driving resulting in death was four years and six months, and one year and six months for hit-and-run. According to regulations, sentencing uses four years and six months as the baseline, with the total sum of both penalties (namely, six years) serving as the sentencing ceiling. Therefore, lay assessors had to choose within the sentencing range of four years and six months to six years. No discussion takes place among lay assessors during this part; after each judge writes down a sentence, the court clerk reads the votes aloud from the longest sentence down to the shortest, and the sentence that reaches a simple majority of over 1/2 is adopted as the judgment length (for example, if there are 10 voters, and the statutory penalty ranges from 1 to 10 years, the clerk reading the votes might encounter: 10 years with 1 vote; 9 years with 0 votes; 8 years with 3 votes; 7, 6, and 5 years with 0 votes; and 4 years with 3 votes. Once reaching 4 years, the 1/2 majority is met, so the sentence would be set at 4 years). In this case, the deliberation resulted in a sentence of five years and four months.

After the Trial, Rethinking the Lay Assessor System

Compared to the American jury system, Taiwan's lay assessor system requires participants not only to decide whether the "charged offense" is established, but also to adjudicate "sentencing." Carrying the weight of a life in the palm of one's hand, Kai-Yang remarked, "The meaning of these four characters [Lay Assessor] turned out to be much more than I imagined."

Consequently, how to exercise caution and avoid misjudgment has become a major challenge. However, whether the current lay assessor mechanism can provide designated lay assessors with sufficient confidence and peace of mind is also an issue worth revisiting. Drawing from personal simulation experience, Kai-Yang offered several suggestions: regarding case deliberation, aside from receiving the indictment before the formal trial, a preliminary meeting could be held to brief everyone on the case and introduce relevant materials, helping them establish a basic grasp of the objective facts; as for the duties of a lay assessor, allowing lay assessors to introduce themselves beforehand to get acquainted could serve as a warm-up for questioning and deliberation, preventing awkward silences. Furthermore, basic concepts regarding trial procedures, technical terms (such as "plaintiff" and "defendant"), and questioning methods could be explained so that people from diverse backgrounds can acquire a foundational understanding of how courts operate, thereby boosting the peace of mind of ordinary citizens taking their seats on the judicial bench.

"My biggest takeaway is that I experienced the accessibility of the judiciary, but I also felt its inaccessibility." Public participation in trials has opened a channel for the general public to approach the court, yet esoteric legal terminology has correspondingly drawn a line between judicial personnel and lay assessors. The judiciary must now contemplate how to make itself more accessible to a broader population while popularizing the concept of the lay assessor among the public. Regardless of age, "turning the four characters of 'Lay Assessor' into a language everyone can understand" and strengthening legal education will be subjects worth pondering after the implementation of the lay assessor system.

"Everyone has their own background and perspective, and I think that is also the significance of the lay assessor system," Kai-Yang reflected. It allows people to understand and participate in the judiciary, letting everyone know the complexity of the judiciary on one hand, while allowing diverse opinions and voices from society to participate in the judiciary itself on the other. Nonetheless, judges should continue to play a role in assisting the formation of judgments and exercise their professionalism, while having more comprehensive complementary measures for social dialogue, so that the lay assessor system can develop more successfully.

As the interview concluded, warm sunlight finally shone through the overcast and rainy Taipei. It is hoped that the new lay assessor system, opening its arms to embrace the public, can likewise dispel the clouds and reveal a more transparent and luminous judicial system.

Postscript: When Lay Assessors Meet the Matsu Wind

Matsu possesses a unique geographical, cultural, and human environment composed of four townships and five islands. Due to its close-knit population structure, almost everyone knows each other. At the same time, many people have their household registrations registered in Matsu while actually residing in Taoyuan. Regarding language usage, besides Taiwanese Hokkien and Mandarin, the local population speaks the Matsu dialect. When the lay assessor system encounters this unique human context, Kai-Yang raised several questions and suggestions:

1. If lay assessors do not understand the local language while the defendant or plaintiff is from Matsu, how should the state safeguard the rights of the plaintiff and defendant? Can an on-site interpretation talent pool be organized to provide assistance to the parties through proper channels?

2. Matsu is a close-knit society where almost everyone knows one another. How can lay assessors avoid post-trial retaliation or the influence of personal relationships on the deliberation of public affairs?

3. Considering the transportation between the islands of Matsu and the fact that many Matsu residents actually live in Taoyuan, if citizens are drawn—or even called back only to not become official lay assessors—how should travel and accommodation expenses, official leave, and weather-affected flights be properly planned to minimize the impact on civic life?

4. Cases tried by lay assessors have specific criteria, and since Matsu usually has very few cases, actual trials involving lay assessors in Matsu may also be rare.

When the lay assessor system meets the winds of Matsu, there are still many matters that must be overcome in adaptation to local conditions. As the new system launches, more research and complementary measures are required so that people in every corner of our country can truly become lay assessors.

Related Information

Participating as a Lay Assessor in Matsu ｜ 01 A Day in the Life of a Lay Assessor
Participating as a Lay Assessor in Matsu ｜ 02 A Diverse and Complex Scene