Print

Mail

wiki links

Editorial: Turning over a new judicial leaf

President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) has complained that 70 percent to 80 percent of Taiwan's judiciary leans toward the pan-blue camp.

Investigations, legal reviews and verdicts involving politicians have been questioned by both the pan-blue and pan-green camps, leading to much criticism about unfairness and political intervention in the process. As a result, the public has once again begun to call for judicial reform.

Among other things, judicial reform should be based in how judicial officials are selected. Changing the attitudes and behavior of the large number of existing judicial officials is a difficult project.

A faster and more effective road to judicial reform is to ensure that the grand justices who lead the system have a solid professional grounding. Bringing about change among other judges and prosecutors starts with this.

Eight new grand justices are about to be appointed, together with a new Judicial Yuan president and vice president. This is a rare opportunity for reform.

It is crucial that these appointments are not blocked like the Control Yuan appointments were. Nor should legislators use political motives to appoint unfit candidates who will block judicial reform.

Before legislators vote for the nominees, a few flaws in the process must be pointed out.

First, the legislature's hearings have been excessively political in nature, with pan-blue legislators asking a few supposedly pro-green-camp nominees questions about their relationships with the president and their opinions of Minister of Education Tu Cheng-sheng (杜正勝).

These legislators wasted a precious opportunity to inquire about the nominees' legal education, trial experience, record of decisions and views on upcoming judicial issues.

Second, although the grand justice nominee review and the nomination of Control Yuan members differ in timing and in the nature of the positions, the two issues have merged in light of political competition and skulduggery.

The pan-blue camp will only pass the grand justice nominations in exchange for the passage of its Control Yuan nomination list, while the pan-green camp will only pass the Control Yuan list if the passage of their grand justice list is guaranteed. This has turned the review into a bargaining chip for backstage negotiations.

Due to the lack of trust between the two camps, the technical issue of whether the nominees should be voted for individually or as a group has degenerated into a source of conflict.

The grand justices are the protectors of the Constitution and have the potential to initiate judicial reform. As the legislature will vote on the nominations tomorrow, legislators need to understand that partisan political concerns should have no bearing on whether or not the nominees as a group should be confirmed.

The new grand justices and the Judicial Yuan's president and vice president must acknowledge the public's wish for an independent judiciary and reform. It's time for the judiciary to look to a truly independent future, not the politically yoked past.
This story has been viewed 1001 times.