(Staff reporter) The Judicial Yuan Council for Judicial Personnel Reform Evaluation convened the 5th Meeting which was presided over by Vice-president Su Yeong-Chin on September 5, 2011, to discuss judge evaluation system issues. Secretary-General Lin Chin-fang expressed that despite the Judge Evaluation Committee being an internal body, it was a tradition of the Judicial Yuan to respect the independence of each committee and administrative intervention was unlikely. Plus, there were external members on the Committee to participate in review and assessment work; the Committee would be able to exercise its function. Furthermore, in line with the principle of the Judge Act being a special law and thus prevailing over general laws, the Judicial Yuan would act according to suggestions from the members of the Committee and consult with the Control Yuan on cases processed after the evaluation procedure was activated. Evaluation would be the priority to avoid waste of resources.
After enthusiastic discussion among the attending members of the Committee, Vice-president Su made the comment that internal and external disciplinary measures had always existed before the Judge Act was legislated. Then there was also the Control Yuan with its constitutional authority. Hence, there had never been any lack of supervision mechanisms. The dissatisfaction of the public was primarily the result of the doubt whether such mechanisms could really achieve the effects expected. External participation in the Evaluation Committee was particularly emphasized in the Judge Act. Through such participation, excessive empathy or heterogeneity could be avoided. Nevertheless, adjustment from macroscopic aspects and coordination with other agencies by the Judicial Yuan would be needed to prevent overlapping of supervision through internal and external mechanisms. In addition, the opinions of the public could be taken into consideration when evaluation was conducted while the performance evaluation indicators could also be adjusted in accordance with the views of the Committee members to perfect the judicial personnel and the supervision system on the condition that judicial independence remained intact.
|
