For the last dozen years, the Judicial Reform Foundation has held high hopes and expectations for the judiciary, and has been attentive in bringing up reform initiatives and providing necessary oversight. We aspire to maintain expertise and enthusiasm for the law and to strengthen the rule of law in Taiwan.
In recent years, investigations into irregularities by government officials have repeatedly caused suspicion and distrust among the public. This trend has made the foundation anxious. In particular, the view that the president's special allowance fund case should be investigated by outsiders and that it is a final decisive battle between two sides imply that judicial action in this case will decide Taiwan's entire future. Being an organization devoted to judicial reform and oversight, at this critical time we must make several declarations and express our expectations.
First, countries ruled by law respect the law and emphasize the system. They above all try and switch the expectation for saintly leaders into trust for the law and the system. Therefore, we would like to appeal to people not to have excessive expectations or hopes for the government or even the judiciary itself. By the same token, there is no need to attack and criticize the judiciary. Rather than hoping for a savior to descend from the heavens, the people should expend greater effort in planting the roots of legal education, nurturing the concept of the rule of law, and working to establish and abide by the law.
Second, criminal responsibility is much different from civil or administrative responsibility, and even more distinct from political responsibility. For criminal responsibility to be firmly established, accusations must pass through a strict process that involves providing evidence, presuming innocence, following the principle of reasonable doubt and establishing criminality based on legal statutes. Therefore politically inflammatory language and the inferences of media commentators, if unable to provide evidence that stands up to scrutiny, do not produce criminal responsibility.
Whether the parties involved take political or moral responsibility actually has nothing to do with the judiciary. Because of the special nature of legal decisions, a judgement will be unfavorable for one party, and unless one can prove using facts, evidence and legal principles that the judgement does not conform to reality, then one should accept the results of the judgment even if one is still not content with the result. This is the concrete manifestation of the spirit of the rule of law.
Finally, the people should leave the actual final legal judgement to the legal system, and judges or prosecutors alike must not make light of public expectations for the law. On major cases with historical significance, these officials should bravely take responsibility and show that they are following the letter of the law and thoroughly understand the issue by explaining complex facts to the world in simple language.
This is a crucial moment for the rule of law. Besides urging the officials involved to show their professionalism by adhering to the law, they should also understand the people's need for thorough and systematic justice. Nothing should be held back in a verdict, and they should be brave enough to show that they are not ashamed of having a sense of mission and justice when serving the nation's citizens.
We also urge the public to leave behind the destructive idea of benevolent and saintly rulers and break their superstitious trust in the government and the judiciary. Instead, all should turn their enthusiasm and energy toward deepening education in the rule of law and strengthening the system so that Taiwan can become a society that respects the rule of law.
The Judicial Reform Foundation was established in 1997.
Translated by Jason Cox
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS