Mon, Apr 24, 2000 page8

• Keep politics away from judiciary

  • By Chang Shen-hsin
  • • 
    • 
    • 

  Executive Yuan Minister Chen Chien-min (陳建民) has asked the Ministry of Justice to the return him to the position of prosecutor following the KMT's electoral defeat. He has also written a personal letter to Judicial Yuan President Weng Yueh-sheng (翁岳生) expressing his willingness to become involved with judicial reform. His move may simply be one way for KMT officials to find positions in the new government. However, we should not overlook the fact that it touches upon the important issue of keeping politics out of the judiciary.

  Article 81 of the Constitution reads as follows: "Judges should hold office for life. No judge shall be removed from office unless he has been found guilty of a criminal offense or subjected to disciplinary measure or declared to be under interdiction. No judge shall, except in accordance with law, be suspended or transferred or have his salary reduced."

  However, under the prolonged political rule and monopolization of power by the KMT, the significance underlying the constitutional guarantee of judges' life-long tenure has been long overlooked. In fact, the office of "judge" has long been seen by many as a stepping stone into a political career. Judges who are interested in becoming politicians keep their eyes open for "golden opportunities" to curry favor with those in power, even as they sit in their chambers.

  From the standpoint of a constitutional separation of power between the executive, judicial, and legislative branches, this type of behavior needs to be corrected. Some judges' fascination with a career in politics is seemingly more important than their work in the judiciary. This explains their inability to shirk political interference.

  Government administrators who once served as judges have abandoned their supposedly "beloved" judicial offices without looking back when faced with calls by those in power. Now that the KMT has been defeated in the election, their passion for "judicial reform" has suddenly been revived.

  This change of attitude is simply too abrupt and the judiciary has good reasons to take a cautious stance so that government administrators who have become jobless as a result of the KMT's defeat do not treat the judiciary as a bomb shelter against political storms. They should not treat positions within the judiciary as a political panacea.

  Perhaps the rotation of political parties could bring about a new beginning for the judiciary and help it establish an impartial image. This is the only way that judges and prosecutors can learn to appreciate the significance of a life-tenure system under which they have no need to conform with the values of political power.

  Both Shou Chi-yang (施啟揚) and Weng Yueh-sheng (翁岳生), the previous and current presidents of the Judicial Yuan, have repeatedly stressed their determination to draw a clear boundary between judicial and political powers. Accordingly, the Judicial Yuan has sanctioned two judges who participated in party primaries for the DPP and KMT for breaching judicial neutrality. Can we believe those government administrators who have actively campaigned for a party's candidate when they now say they will be able to "enforce the law fairly and pass unbiased judgement?" If our judicial organs are able to accept these judges, how do they justify their demand for "judicial neutrality?"

  Actually, severing the umbilical cord between law and politics isn't all that difficult. Former commissioner of the Provincial Council Hsieh Chin-ting (謝金汀) requested to be returned to his judicial office after the downsizing of Taiwan's Provincial Government. The Judicial Yuan, under strong protest from numerous district court representatives, denied the request.

  The judicial system has long-striven for progress in terms of separating judicial and political power. Hopefully, the judiciary will never ever again take the back road.

  The times are changing, the tide is changing as well and beliefs, therefore, must also change. Of course, judges can still choose to become politicians. However, they must be held responsible for their choices.

  Chang Sheng-hsin is a judge in the Taichung district court.
• Most Popular

  • 1

    Chinese technicians join airport MRT project

  • 2

    A train for whom? Is a new monorail helpful for Cairo?

  • 3

    Apple is giving Intel’s turnaround some momentum

  • 4

    Uncrewed US craft transits the Taiwan Strait

  • 5

    Starlux to expand long-haul flight offerings