Print

Mail

wiki links

Lawmakers review of justices called `unprofessional'

The Judicial Reform Foundation yesterday said that lawmakers have been "unprofessional" when they were reviewing and interviewing candidates for the Council of Grand Justices.

"I am very sorry to say that they have talked too much about politics instead of asking relevant questions about law, the Constitution and legal issues when they were interviewing the candidates," said Shirley Lin (林靜萍), the foundation's executive-general.

Lin also complained that some of the lawmakers took advantage of speaking during the legislative meeting to say things that were not related to what they were supposed to do -- to review the candidates' resumes and ask them questions about legal matters.

"I must say, most of the questions they asked were not professional and made the candidates look like fools during the meeting," Lin said.

"Most lawmakers were talking about their own policies or their views of the judicial system. The candidates should have been the focus and not the lawmakers' policies or opinions."

Lawyer Lee Yuan-teh (李元德) said that it is not proper to evaluate the candidates with yes-no questions. However, lawmakers did not avoid these questions in the meeting.

"The main purpose of reviewing their resumes and interviewing them in person is to get to know the candidates' attitudes, reactions and opinions through questions concerning the Constitution, because their future work will be to interpret the Constitution. But I did not see this happen during the past few days," Lee said.

Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Lawmaker Wei Ming-ku's (魏明谷) question for the grand justice nominees during Wed-nesday's meeting -- "Are judicial officials better than military judicial officials in their work?" -- was regarded the worst question asked since Sept. 8, when lawmakers began to review nominees' resumes and interview them in person.

In the meantime, People First Party (PFP) Lawmaker Shen Chih-hui (沈智慧) asked the nominees 40 questions with yes or no answers, which, according to the foundation, humiliated the future grand justices because the questions were extremely easy.

However, the foundation also mentioned that the questions asked by three lawmak-ers, DPP Lawmakers Lin Chin-hsing (林進興) and Yu Ching (尤清) and PFP Lawmaker Huang Yi-chiao (黃義交), were quite "professional."

"Obviously, they have done their homework before the meeting," Lin said. "Their questions were to the point and relevant."

Both Lin and Lee encouraged lawmakers to do more research before they speak on Monday, which will be the last day of the review and interview process.

After concluding the process, the final approval of the candidates will be carried out on Sept. 16.
This story has been viewed 2043 times.