The Judicial Yuan has established a committee on reviewing the judge’s code to clearly define and provide guidance for the behavior of judges within and outside their official duties and activities. The first meeting was held on the 17th of February. In the meeting, a draft of “the Judges Code of Ethics” was finalized to serve as an authorized decree in response to the approval of the Judges Law in the future as well as reaching a preliminary consensus on the issue of erecting a relevant consulting institution.
Article 13 of the Judges Law draft clearly stipulates that the judges ought to observe the Judges Code of Ethics. In 2007, the Judicial Yuan constructed a task force team in an act to create “the Judges Code of Ethics” and to be made official by the Judges Law Since that time, five meetings and one public hearing examination were conducted before they formulated “the Judges Code of Ethics draft” that contains 27 articles. In that meeting, they focused on four main issues and their appropriateness; they consist of Guiding Principles, the Conduct of Engaging Judicial Duties, the Judicial Administration, and the Activities Outside Judicial Duties. They also consulted on the code of ethics and if it sufficiently covers the conduct and behavior of the judges and whether a proper consulting institution for the Judges Code is to be established under the drafted clause.
All participants of the meeting believed that the freedom of speech for the judges must accord with the proportionality principle and the constraint of suffrage be conducted with caution. Also, the participants approved the structural part of the draft, other than the Guiding Principles,. They all agreed that the code of ethics for the judges accords with the national environment and situation. Moreover, most committee members supported the establishment of a consulting institution.
In short, this meeting concluded a consensus over the four mentioned issues and the roadmap of formulation. The next meeting will review the concrete contents of the Judges Code of Ethics based on the consensus reached in this meeting.
2012年10月30日 星期二
The Committee for Evaluation of Judicial Role-Play Reform under the Judicial Yuan Held first Meeting
The Committee for Evaluation of Judicial Role-Play Reform under the Judicial Yuan Held Its First Meeting. The Committee Reviewed Three Major Issues, Including Whether the Judicial Yuan Annexes the Roles of Judicial Administration and Trial Judgments is Appropriate or not. The Evaluation is Expected to be Completed in May.
To evaluate the effectiveness of judicial role-play reform concerning institutionalized trial judgments of the Judicial Yuan concluded in the meeting of national judicial reform in 1999. The Judicial Yuan invited various representatives and directors of relevant divisions of the Judicial Yuan to form “the Committee for Evaluation of Judicial Role-Play Reform under the Judicial Yuan.” Vice President-in-Law Su, Yung-Chin presided over the first meeting in person on the 14th of February.
Through enthusiastic discussions, participating members of the committee reached a consensus over the evaluation process, and acknowledged that the past judicial role-play reform was based on the understandings of the issues “the justice overrides trial judgments,” “current system does not accord with the essence of the Constitution” and “the legal interpretations of the final trial courts do not accord with each other.” Also, the committee agreed to push forward the reform philosophy of institutionalized trial judgments and a pyramidal judicial system. Since the resistance remains tough, no completion timetable of the reform can be anticipated. Moreover, whether the reform philosophy and measures go beyond the aforementioned issues and whether it imposes a major impact on our national judicial system requires new review and evaluation. The chairman, taking account of the comments of the participating members generalized three major pending issues concerning past judicial role-play reform philosophy, including:
(1) Whether the Judicial Yuan annexes the roles of judicial administration and trial judgments is appropriate or not?
(2) If uni-roleplay reform under single track is adopted, does it mean to also adopt decentralized hearings violating the Constitution?
(3) If the judicial Yuan transforms itself into “uni-roleplay under single track,” does it mean that the administrative courts of various levels shall also be incorporated into ordinary courts? Meanwhile, the chairman determined that the following meetings ought to continue to evaluate and review the understandings of these three new issues, together with continued review about the issue of the Constitutional Interpretation of Ref. No. Shih 530. The evaluation report is expected to be completed in May and subject to review and discussion of the Policy Council of the National Judicial Reform.
To evaluate the effectiveness of judicial role-play reform concerning institutionalized trial judgments of the Judicial Yuan concluded in the meeting of national judicial reform in 1999. The Judicial Yuan invited various representatives and directors of relevant divisions of the Judicial Yuan to form “the Committee for Evaluation of Judicial Role-Play Reform under the Judicial Yuan.” Vice President-in-Law Su, Yung-Chin presided over the first meeting in person on the 14th of February.
Through enthusiastic discussions, participating members of the committee reached a consensus over the evaluation process, and acknowledged that the past judicial role-play reform was based on the understandings of the issues “the justice overrides trial judgments,” “current system does not accord with the essence of the Constitution” and “the legal interpretations of the final trial courts do not accord with each other.” Also, the committee agreed to push forward the reform philosophy of institutionalized trial judgments and a pyramidal judicial system. Since the resistance remains tough, no completion timetable of the reform can be anticipated. Moreover, whether the reform philosophy and measures go beyond the aforementioned issues and whether it imposes a major impact on our national judicial system requires new review and evaluation. The chairman, taking account of the comments of the participating members generalized three major pending issues concerning past judicial role-play reform philosophy, including:
(1) Whether the Judicial Yuan annexes the roles of judicial administration and trial judgments is appropriate or not?
(2) If uni-roleplay reform under single track is adopted, does it mean to also adopt decentralized hearings violating the Constitution?
(3) If the judicial Yuan transforms itself into “uni-roleplay under single track,” does it mean that the administrative courts of various levels shall also be incorporated into ordinary courts? Meanwhile, the chairman determined that the following meetings ought to continue to evaluate and review the understandings of these three new issues, together with continued review about the issue of the Constitutional Interpretation of Ref. No. Shih 530. The evaluation report is expected to be completed in May and subject to review and discussion of the Policy Council of the National Judicial Reform.
訂閱：
文章 (Atom)