January 30-February 5, 2012
Headline News
New “jury panel” proposal will be mere rubber stamp for “dinosaur” judges, says legislator
Reported by Simon Lin and Lin Yi-ying
Written by Lydia Ma
In response to allegations that many judges in Taiwan have too much liberty and suspicions that they have accepted bribes in controversial rulings, the Judicial Yuan proposed a series of reforms on January 11, 2012, which includes a “Jury System” pilot program. The purpose of this new jury system is to allow the public limited participation in the trial process and thus boost the credibility of the Judicial Yuan, which has been derided of fostering “dinosaur judges”.
However, this new system was met with concern by DPP legislator Tien Chiu-chin, a Christian, who believes that these reforms are flawed. Tien underscored that the proposed new system will not only fail to create a real jury panel, but will also act as a mere rubber stamp for corrupt “dinosaur” judges.
Tien said that the proposed jury system is different from European or American jury systems in that judges in Taiwan will still influence and interfere with the verdict of the jury, as the latter will function more like a group of observers asked to give their opinions. Hence, it is only by adopting the European or the American jury system, where members of the jury come to a decision independently and the judge merely announces the verdict, that there can be genuine judicial reform in Taiwan.
In related news, a petition nicknamed “Reform the Supreme Court and get rid of hotbeds for dinosaur judges” sponsored by Taipei District Court Judge Lin Meng-huang and Yang Kun-chiao, which began on December 26, 2011, has so far garnered the support and signature of 518 out of 1,888 justices in Taiwan. The petition states that grassroots-level justices should elect the Supreme Court Chief Justice because they would be better equipped to select a good candidate for the job.
Lin and Taoyuan District Court Judge Chien Chien-jung told the media that the Supreme Court decides matters ranging from the interpretation of laws and their application to getting rid of judges’ performance appraisal systems . The selection of district court justices and President of the Supreme Court is also decided by the Supreme Court, but biased Supreme Court justices, who tend to choose candidates that align more with their views., have marred this process Hence, judicial reform at all levels of the judiciary is necessary and courageous leadership is needed to initiate and oversee such a reform.
