During the process of criminal proceedings, prosecutors are a party to the litigation, and are therefore not fair or impartial participants in the trial.
For this reason, if we were to allow prosecutors to be a party to a case and provide them with an enforceable right to make a disposition, that would not only be unfair and unjust, but would be subject to abuse and overreach.
Therefore, in a modern democracy, a prosecutor should have no enforceable right to make a disposition whatsoever against a defendant.
This legal concept has long been established in Taiwan since the early 1990s, especially among legislators belonging to the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), who requested a constitutional interpretation on the issue in 1995.
These legislators invited me to be the appraiser of the legal question submitted before the grand justices. As such, I went before the court and strongly advocated that they abolish prosecutors’ right to custody/pretrial detention, the motion of which was subsequently adopted by the grand justices.
In 1998, another appraiser went before the grand justices and proposed an interpretation for the abolition of prosecutors’ right to searches.
I was asked to comment on the matter, and I submitted an article in which I expounded upon my ideas that, as prosecutors were considered parties to legal cases, they should in no way have any enforceable power to make dispositions.
As a result, not only should prosecutors’ rights to searches be abolished, so too should their right to detain — restraining people’s freedom of movement — otherwise the reform could not be considered complete.
However, as the person who requested the interpretation only specified the prosecutors’ right to search, the interpretation did not broach the issue of the right to detain.
That being the case, this day, the fears I had at the time has come to pass.
When a problem with prosecutors occurs, they fully shift their responsibility to the police and do not reflect on the matter in the least, which is a problem for the nation and the public.
I am well aware that neither the legal world nor prosecutors are fond of outside criticism, but they must know that criticism is the driving force behind progress and without it, there could be no progress.
Huan Tong-shong is a former president of National Chung Hsing University.
Translated by Tim Smith
As the war in Burma stretches into its 76th year, China continues to play both sides. Beijing backs the junta, which seized power in the 2021 coup, while also funding some of the resistance groups fighting the regime. Some suggest that Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) is hedging his bets, positioning China to side with the victors regardless of the outcome. However, a more accurate explanation is that China is acting pragmatically to safeguard its investments and ensure the steady flow of natural resources and energy for its economy. China’s primary interest is stability and supporting the junta initially seemed like the best
In honor of President Jimmy Carter’s 100th birthday, my longtime friend and colleague John Tkacik wrote an excellent op-ed reassessing Carter’s derecognition of Taipei. But I would like to add my own thoughts on this often-misunderstood president. During Carter’s single term as president of the United States from 1977 to 1981, despite numerous foreign policy and domestic challenges, he is widely recognized for brokering the historic 1978 Camp David Accords that ended the state of war between Egypt and Israel after more than three decades of hostilities. It is considered one of the most significant diplomatic achievements of the 20th century.
Numerous expert analyses characterize today’s US presidential election as a risk for Taiwan, given that the two major candidates, US Vice President Kamala Harris and former US president Donald Trump, are perceived to possess divergent foreign policy perspectives. If Harris is elected, many presume that the US would maintain its existing relationship with Taiwan, as established through the American Institute in Taiwan, and would continue to sell Taiwan weapons and equipment to help it defend itself against China. Under the administration of US President Joe Biden, whose political views Harris shares, the US on Oct. 25 authorized arms transfers to Taiwan, another
The US election result will significantly impact its foreign policy with global implications. As tensions escalate in the Taiwan Strait and conflicts elsewhere draw attention away from the western Pacific, Taiwan was closely monitoring the election, as many believe that whoever won would confront an increasingly assertive China, especially with speculation over a potential escalation in or around 2027. A second Donald Trump presidency naturally raises questions concerning the future of US policy toward China and Taiwan, with Trump displaying mixed signals as to his position on the cross-strait conflict. US foreign policy would also depend on Trump’s Cabinet and