The Judicial Yuan held the third meeting of the Evaluation Committee on Civil Lawsuit Reform Effectiveness presided by Deputy Secretary General Chiang, Jen-Hsiu. The conclusion includes the followings:
(1)On experts involvement of court trial hearing: Since various participant members have doubts and questions on whether the experts involvement concerns the issues of violating the Constitution, evading public trial and evidence investigation procedure, no preferable consensus is reached among the committee members, causing a failure of legislating such proposal. To achieve the basic reform idea of allowing people's involvement of judicial trial hearings, judges are advised to invite experts to participate in the trial interrogation on the trial cases of professional or special pattern nature. In the practice, the experts only serve to provide opinions for court reference without involvement of fact identification and application of laws and regulations. Also, verification mechanism shall be reinforced. So doing allows parties concerned to have affair opportunity in participating in the defense debate. Accordingly, the trial decision can have more justification and trustworthy nature. Another option is to introduce the institution of special commission members adopted in Japan.
(2)On consensus choice of trial judge on civil lawsuit cases: Since the Tentative Regulations on Consensus Choice of Trial Judge(s) on Civil Lawsuit Cases is expired on September 5, 2008, it shall cease in effect. Most participant members believe that such institution shall be limited only to the cases applicable to the parties concerned who can handle their lawsuit goal. Also, the decision once made shall not be filed to a higher court of appealing. In view of the said Regulations being seldom adopted on trial cases during the effective five-year duration, it is obvious that people appear reluctant in facing such institution. Besides, the limited judicial resources are better to be used in the reform fields more urgently required that people consider. Therefore, it is advised that such institution seems inappropriate in pushing forward to the reality for the time being.
(3)On the publicizing decision records after the trial: Via revision of relevant regulations on Court Organization Law and Publicizing Judge Decision Records, the cases shall be accessed by the people upon the trial decision is finalized and the people shall be free to access to judge decision records. This action attains the goal proposed in the 1999 National Judicial Reform Conference.
(4)On whether the court decision document shall attach the opinions of various parties concerned: The undertaking of attaching the opinions of various parties concerned does accord with the legal institution applicable to the continental law system and violates the confidentiality obligation of judge(s)'s decision-making. If the purpose proposed serves only to understand the different opinions of the full court, the issue may be answered via improving currently applied institution, such as the improvement of current practice of recording the decision-making minutes (i.e., current practice only covers the holding of the judgment, conclusion or approved by …). Judges record their respective opinions in the decision-making minute book. Also, under current Court Organization Law, the parties concerned can apply for reading and accessing the judge decision-making comment minute book after the trial decision is reached. Thus, it appears that no necessity of attaching the different opinions to the decision documents of courts of various levels as of the present time.
|
