TAIPEI (Taiwan News) — Experts clashed during a Legislative Yuan hearing on Monday (Dec. 2) over the qualifications of judicial nominees, including seven justices for the Constitutional Court and the president and vice president of the Judicial Yuan.
The KMT’s experts targeted the nominees’ stance on the death penalty, while the TPP’s expert raised concerns about the lack of diversity in the nominees’ areas of expertise, per CNA. However, the ruling DPP defended the nominees' competency.
The DPP’s expert, Institutum Iurisprudentiae Academia Sinica researcher Su Yen-tu (蘇彥圖), emphasized that a justice’s character, moral integrity, competence, and openness to listen should be the primary criteria for selection. National Taipei University assistant professor Hong Wei-sheng (洪偉勝) argued against an overemphasis on backgrounds, citing the success of Taiwan's WBSC Premier12 baseball team as an example of the value of competency over history.
Jacob C.H. Lin (林俊宏), managing attorney at Cogito Law Office, suggested a holistic approach to evaluating the nominees. He urged lawmakers to assess the nominees based on their qualifications and commitment to constitutional principles, rather than focusing on a single remark or past event.
On the other hand, KMT-recommended expert Chang Chieh-neng (張介能), an assistant professor at Taiwan Steel University of Science and Technology and the widower of a murdered teacher, expressed his opposition by highlighting the case of his wife’s murderer, who was sentenced to life imprisonment. He argued that Taiwan's life imprisonment sentences were often seen as fixed terms, which could cause further harm to the victims' families.
Retired prosecutor Chen Jui-jen (陳瑞仁) critiqued the potential appointment of justices with a strong ideological bias, urging that nominees should be evaluated based on their practical experience and not just political beliefs. He also called for a compromise to avoid a second round of nominations if the process becomes overly contentious.
Retired Tunghai University law professor Lin Teng-yao (林騰鷂) criticized the competency of the judicial nominees, singling out Chang Wen-chen (張文貞), nominee for Judicial Yuan president, and Yao Li-ming (姚立明), nominee for vice president. Lin questioned Chang’s faith in popular sovereignty, citing her involvement in a government case that opposed broadening Legislative power, and criticized Yao for his lack of substantial academic contributions.
The TPP's Liu Shu-pin (劉書彬), a professor at Soochow University, echoed concerns about the nominees’ expertise, urging a broader perspective to better serve vulnerable members of society. Liu argued that the focus on criminal, administrative, and constitutional law lacked the necessary diversity for a truly representative judiciary.
