The Judicial Reform Foundation has been concerned with wrongful accusations involving dummy-account fraud and systemic human rights violations for over a decade, starting from 2013.

With the enactment of Article 15-2 of the Money Laundering Control Act regarding the offense of simply handing over an account, followed by the Executive Yuan's latest rollout of the Fraud Crime Hazard Prevention Act, the Communication Security and Surveillance Act, the Money Laundering Control Act, and the Technology Investigative Methods Act currently undergoing sequential review in the Legislative Yuan, we have time and again watched the battle against crime on one end of the scale and human rights protection on the other, struggling within the predicament of being a "state of fraud."

Supreme Court Criminal Judgment 111-Tai-Shang-1075: "The court should comprehensively weigh various subjective and objective factors as well as the personal circumstances of the actor to determine whether the actor's act of handing over an account constitutes the offense of aiding money laundering or aiding fraud." Supreme Court Criminal Judgment 111-Tai-Shang-2664: "One cannot use the knowledge and experience of an objective ordinary person as a benchmark to presumptively infer that such persons must possess the same level of alertness and must have foreseen the facts constituting the crime."

With an urgent demand to combat fraud, where should the controversy over the broad determination of subjective elements involved in dummy-account fraud go from here?

As the implementation of the amendments to the Money Laundering Control Act approaches its first anniversary, our Foundation, alongside the Legal Aid Foundation, the Taichung Bar Association, and the Tainan Bar Association, jointly organized the [Symposium on Practical Responses in the Post-Dummy-Account Era] in Taichung, Tainan, and Taipei respectively.

The symposium invited lawyers, judges, and prosecutors from the practical field, as well as professors from academia, to discuss how legal practice should respond to the predicament of the post-dummy-account era. It is also hoped that relevant authorities, while contemplating the fight against crime, will not neglect the protection of human rights.

 

Sessions

 

Attachments

• Taiwan High Court Kaohsiung Branch Criminal Judgment 112-Chin-Shang-Su-144
• Supreme Court Criminal Judgment 112-Tai-Shang-2673
• Ministry of Justice Official Document Fa-Jian-Chueh-Tzu No. 11204538300
• National Police Agency Official Document Ching-Shu-Hsing-Ching-Tzu No. 1120012720

Organizer

Judicial Reform Foundation

Co-organizers

Legal Aid Foundation
Taichung Bar Association
Tainan Bar Association