Judges are supposed to uphold justice. They should be the last line of defense in the judicial system. It is surprising, then, that Taiwanese judges have come close to the bottom in the recently published Taiwan Social Trust Survey. This unfortunate fact is more than a warning. It is an absolute disgrace.
The fact that the judiciary has arrived at this sorry state of affairs is certainly not without reason. Huang Jui-hua (黃瑞華) recently resigned as president of the Yilan District Court to protest the manner in which court officials and members of the Judicial Yuan tend to close ranks. This is another example of how bad things are. One is forced to conclude that the judiciary is something of a lost cause.
Huang quit because as head of the district court she was not happy with the decision by the court’s disciplinary committee to downgrade a disciplinary action imposed on the hapless Judge Chen Jia-nien (陳嘉年) from a written admonishment, as she had recommended, to a mere reprimand. Then the Judicial Yuan’s Judicial Personnel Review Committee declined even to issue a reprimand, letting Chen off with just a verbal warning.
With the disciplinary committee on one side and the personnel review committee on the other, both working to “protect their own,” Huang’s attempts at reform were destined to be thwarted. This being the case, her position became untenable. How could she not step down?
To see Huang’s resignation as nothing more than a dig at the Judicial Yuan is to give the issue less gravity than it deserves.
The important thing is that the Judicial Yuan missed an opportunity to redeem itself. In its own institutional self-interest, it frustrated Huang in her determination for reform and disciplinary action and subverted her authority as president of the district court.
Judges operate with impunity, handing down harsh penalties to defendants while tolerating each other’s abuses. Good judges follow suit, and disregard the rights of the public, unconcerned about trust in the judiciary. This is the beginning of a very slippery slope.
Huang began her resignation letter to Judicial Yuan President Rai Hau-min (賴浩敏) by asking him whether she was wrong. She asked him, when the interests of the judiciary come into conflict with the rights of the public, with which party the Judicial Yuan sides.
Huang knows whom she sides with: The public.
For her, Chen’s actions were a serious detriment to the rights of individuals involved in the cases he was hearing. First he neglected to ask social workers to attend the victim in a sexual assault trial, as is required, thereby subjecting her to a grueling cross-examination that ultimately resulted in her running from the court in tears. Chen had also delayed submitting papers for a year and 10 months. He has continually shown himself over the past three years to be a “dinosaur judge.”
Rather than Chen being sacrificed to the cause of judicial reform, however, it has been Huang, the person who has been trying to live up to public expectations, who has been cast as the bad guy.
Huang’s departure is but one chapter in this saga, but it at least shows us that courageous souls do still exist in that world, beacons of light in the darkness. We can only hope that she continues to shine, one day to rekindle the judiciary, to guide it back into the light.
Well done, Huang Jui-hua. We applaud you.
Chin Heng-wei is editor-in-chief of Contemporary Monthly magazine.
TRANSLATED BY PAUL COOPER
The US Senate’s passage of the 2026 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which urges Taiwan’s inclusion in the Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) exercise and allocates US$1 billion in military aid, marks yet another milestone in Washington’s growing support for Taipei. On paper, it reflects the steadiness of US commitment, but beneath this show of solidarity lies contradiction. While the US Congress builds a stable, bipartisan architecture of deterrence, US President Donald Trump repeatedly undercuts it through erratic decisions and transactional diplomacy. This dissonance not only weakens the US’ credibility abroad — it also fractures public trust within Taiwan. For decades,
In 1976, the Gang of Four was ousted. The Gang of Four was a leftist political group comprising Chinese Communist Party (CCP) members: Jiang Qing (江青), its leading figure and Mao Zedong’s (毛澤東) last wife; Zhang Chunqiao (張春橋); Yao Wenyuan (姚文元); and Wang Hongwen (王洪文). The four wielded supreme power during the Cultural Revolution (1966-1976), but when Mao died, they were overthrown and charged with crimes against China in what was in essence a political coup of the right against the left. The same type of thing might be happening again as the CCP has expelled nine top generals. Rather than a
Taiwan Retrocession Day is observed on Oct. 25 every year. The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government removed it from the list of annual holidays immediately following the first successful transition of power in 2000, but the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT)-led opposition reinstated it this year. For ideological reasons, it has been something of a political football in the democratic era. This year, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) designated yesterday as “Commemoration Day of Taiwan’s Restoration,” turning the event into a conceptual staging post for its “restoration” to the People’s Republic of China (PRC). The Mainland Affairs Council on Friday criticized
The topic of increased intergenerational conflict has been making headlines in the past few months, showcasing a problem that would only grow as Taiwan approaches “super-aged society” status. A striking example of that tension erupted on the Taipei MRT late last month, when an apparently able-bodied passenger kicked a 73-year-old woman across the width of the carriage. The septuagenarian had berated and hit the young commuter with her bag for sitting in a priority seat, despite regular seats being available. A video of the incident went viral online. Altercations over the yielding of MRT seats are not common, but they are
RSS