The rusty judiciary
A few days ago, I was outraged by a report on a news channel. Not surprisingly, I was not the only person who was infuriated by the report.
The uproar was provoked by a report that a Japanese exchange student was allegedly raped by a taxi driver in New Taipei City (新北市). After a police investigation, the driver was found and indicted by the prosecutor.
The prosecutor thought the taxi driver had behaved like a felon and wanted permission for further detention from the Banciao District Court. However, the judge ruled that the alleged rapist be released on NT$50,000 bail (“Bail of alleged rapist draws complaint,” July 15, page 2).
After the taxi driver’s release, the public, netizens and the Japanese student’s boyfriend all voiced discontent, netizens even sarcastically calling the judge “one of the ‘dinosaur judges’ in our rusty judiciary.”
The taxi driver alleged that the case was not a sexual assault, but a one-night stand, saying he did not force the girl to have intercourse with him, and that maybe it all resulted from the language barrier.
Since there was no accomplice and because the culprit did not give any indication that he might abscond, the judge decided to release him on bail.
The main reason was that the prosecutor’s primary reason to detain him was not sufficient on the basis of Constitutional Interpretation No. 665 — a prosecutor cannot detain a suspect solely on an alleged felony violation.
What made me so furious was not the court’s statement, but that the judge did not appear in public to explain it.
A judge must be responsible to the public for his or her verdict.
Just as our Constitution stipulates that judges pass all judicial verdicts independently, judges should have the courage to face public criticism over their verdicts.
While the judge offered an explanation through his supervisor, to my disappointment, his supervisor gave it in a telephone interview.
Rather than regard this as a positive way to clarify his position, I see this as counterproductive.
The reason for the judge’s rejection of the prosecutor’s demand for detention added fuel to the fire, and made me even more furious.
Even if the prosecutor’s request didn’t meet the standard of Constitutional Interpretation No. 665, judges should still take all factors and evidence into consideration. In my view, the judge didn’t treat this case as if the victim were his daughter. Would the ruling have been the same in that case?
Now, the most powerful media in Taiwan, the Apple Daily, cannot even find this taxi driver. How could the judge believe that the taxi driver wouldn’t abscond? If the paparazzi cannot find the suspect, I wonder who can?
Tell all your female friends, protecting themselves is more practical than expecting a judge to find the suspect.
Wearing the blue robe in court represents justice and fairness. Courage is also required when a verdict causes public uproar. Do you dare face public criticism, my dear judge?
TOM TSOU
Taipei
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US