|Taiwan's legal system criticism ★ this site's world No. 1 in 2017~18, 2016, 2015, 2014, 2013, 2010~12 ★ Top rankings since 1998|
Is Taiwan or Taipei a
living safety place? Low personal risk is the most important factor of criteria
The EIU's Liveability Ranking
( the Economist
Intelligence Unit global “liveability” study),
Monocle's Most Liveable
Mercer Quality of Living Survey.
Taiwan's National Chung
Cheng university survey
(head-page of the Liberty Times, 2-23-2016):
Nearly 80% Taiwanese don't believe
the impartiality of
Taiwan's prosecutors, and
public trust on Taiwan
judiciary system keeps falling down in
the past 8 years. NCCU
70% Taiwanese people are not satisfy
security/public order (criminal rate,"治安狀況"),
50.4% Taiwanese worry becoming next victim
in criminal/security cases("遭侵害"), which reach a
new high within recent 5 years (<Apple
Do you accept these legal judgments ? ― someone being least welcome & being evicted/expelled kept staying in your house, and infuriated a 90 years old grandma suffering with Cardiac failure (weak heart), Coronary artery heart disease, Hypertension etc (more likely leading to a death in Fall or Winter) , but you failed to ask/evict and pull/push (not strong enough because of having serious disease ) the 'home intruder (invader) / unlawful detainer ' out, then this suspected intruder (invader) continued to insult by strident voice & violent words like "You're incapable", and stayed 30-50 minutes after receiving formal expel-notice to leave, eventually police with guns came ....
Taiwan's prosecutors of Taipei District Court judged the 'home intruder/invader' was not intend to stay because the 'invader' left the house after armed police's communication & persuasion, so the prosecutor decided not to indict the 'invader'. Instead, this prosecutor decided to indict the house owner for Offenses of Causing Bodily Harm (appear minor injury not proved to be done by house-owner yet).
PS: This web-page will call (according to Taiwan's criminal law - Article 306, "Crime of Home Invasion") the house-guest unwanted & failed to be expelled as "home intruder/invader" (means "home invader suspect" or "unlawful detainer suspect") for the offence of illegal infringement of citizens.
◆ a larceny /theft/damage & impairment case concluded by Prosecutor WEN TZU-TE, click !!
|Taiwan's judicial system evaluated by famous institutions of local & int'l|
Chung Cheng university's survey
(head-page of the Liberty Times, 2-23-2016):
Nearly 80% Taiwanese don't
the impartiality of
Taiwan's prosecutors, and
public trust on Taiwan
judiciary system keeps falling down in
the past 8 years.
●USA Country Reports on Human Rights practices, 6-26-2015, 2-27-2014 (US state dept.): Taiwan's judicial system suffered from some corruption. Although authorities made efforts to eliminate corruption and diminish political influence in the judiciary, some residual problems remained... the impartiality of judges and prosecutors involved in high-profile and politically sensitive cases had been questioned.
● 06-18-2016, Head page news: Taiwan's prosecutors usually follow their boss's (commanding officer) order to access and rule legal cases ... " He is bigger than I am, what can I say??" (檢察)
●The deputy dean of Law School, National Cheng-Chi University, 5-2015) : the standard of judgments on the same matters varies from person to person all the time is the reason why Taiwanese people do not believe Taiwan's judiciary.
●The United Daily, 08-24-2016 , Editorial: Taiwan's Judiciary and Legislative institutions never have a sense of shame on releasing major crimes of international fraud , and never have intention to stop this criminal actions by punishments...
●USA Country Reports on Human Rights practices,
April 19, 2013
● <Transparency International>, Germany, July 9, 2013
The finding of the 2013 Global
Corruption Barometer (GCB), ( the
Gallup Poll to interview 114,000 people
in 107 countries all over the world):
The article under the theme of （Corruption in Taiwan--Confirming the worst suspicions） reported :Three high-court judges and a prosecutor had been detained amid allegations that they took bribes to fix the outcome of a high-profile case, has brought public outrage to boiling point.
Taiwan Foundation for Democracy (TFD )> survey,
Dec. 10, 2013
<Liberty Times>, <TTV>, etc, 1.28.2014
|pic.: No.1 ranking on google by keyword "Taiwan prosecutors", test at 9-3-2016||pic.: No.1 ranking on google by keyword "comment Taiwan judiciary" in Chinese, test at 9-3-2016|
Closer look at these 2 legal cases:
House owner's comments
no need to (has not) summon the eye-witness
judgment should unbiased hear all the evidence given by both sides.
But, the prosecutor did not summon house-owner and 2 eye-witness persons to the court-room, and did not see DVD ( as eye-witness evidence) which recording home invader's bad behavior and intension not to leave, and then jumped to a conclusion ― prosecution of the house owner (90 years old person's son trying to save his mother).
|2||Ignore serious criminal cases||
Taiwan's prosecutors ignore so
many rape cases in Taiwan, but to indict a little self-defense
case. Taiwan does not have enough prosecutors and judges to access
many cases, so important & serious cases should be accessed first
(rape crime hurts Oriental women badly, worse than tiny injury - if any).
USA Country Reports on Human Rights practices (2013) criticized Taiwan's prosecution rate of rape cases is too low ― "as of September there were 10,951 reports filed for rape or sexual assault. As of September, courts indicted 1,814 persons and convicted 1,685 persons...". USA Country Reports on Human Rights practices (2014) is about the same.
There're also many serious domestic (marriage) violence ― abusive behavior that one partner to maintain power and control over another intimate partner, Taiwan's prosecution rate of those serious cases is very very low.
|3||The home invader left the house after policemen's communication/persuasion, so prosecutor concludes this proves the intruder/invader was not intend to stay in other's residence||If the home intruder/invader was not intend to stay for a long time, why did the house owner call the police to come ? Policemen with gun came, certainly the home intruder/invader scared and left the house very soon.|
|4||The home intruder/invader said that arguing with and making things clear to the house-owner is why the home intruder/invader stayed so long regardless of expel-notices. But the prosecutor think it's a very reasonable reason for the intruder/invader to keep staying another's house.||
(1) The home intruder/invader is dangerous ― endangering a
90 years-old person's health&life by violent words, so this
(2) The home intruder/invader admitted having driven a 90 years old grandma very mad so as to strike the table .
(3) The home intruder/invader didn't explain anything, but make noise and violent words (see DVD).
(4) The home intruder/invader should leave the house very soon after the house owner asked intruder/invader out, according to scholar book, High Courts judgment precedents and the criminal law - Article 306: Anyone stays in other's residence regardless of house-owner's expel-request, will be charged sentence below 1 year ... .
|5.||The house owner held a chair against (椅子頂) the home intruder/invader's chest.||
the home intruder/invader changed this phrase (no longer say "held a chair..."
since investigation court, and no longer say it in the statement
document forward to the legal court) but the prosecutor
sill believed house owner did battery to the intruder/invader by a chair by her so called "free
evaluation of evidence through inner conviction". 2
eye-witness persons already expressed the house owner did not did any
battery to the house intruder/invader by chair or stool or fist. (see DVD)
(2) Taiwan's police was even more absurd ― changed the house-owner's statement in the police-station initial-questioning report and made a phony story (that even the home intruder/invader has not said) ― the house owner "flung (by a chair) the home intruder/invader to the ground".
|6||Taiwan's prosecutor thinks this case happened for a trivial (little "細故") matter.||
The home intruder/invader suspect should at least
committed the following criminal offenses (The home
admitted some bad behaviors, video camera's DVD recorded home
some bad behavior
and violent words.):
(1) the Crime of Unlawful staying in the Dwelling House of Another Person ― the 2nd part of article 306, the Crime of Illegal Intrusion into Other Persons Residence, Taiwan Criminal Law.
(2) Offenses Against Reputation. (by home intruder/invader's lots of humiliating words like "Your son is no good!, You're incapable ... !")
(3) Offenses Against Abandonment.
(4) Crime of insulting another.
(6) Domestic violence.
Are criminal behaviors that be against Criminal Law - Article 306
etc, Civil Law, Article 18, 19, 184, 195 a "trivial matter"??
|7||The home intruder/invader stayed more than 30-50 minutes||
(1)The home intruder/invader admitted <a>understanding house-owner's expel-notice,
but just choose to stay with no reason. <b> Eating, drinking, sleeping are
some reasons to stay there.
(2)According to scholar book, High Courts judgment precedents, the home intruder/invader should picks all belongings and leaves the house immediately . At that day, the home intruder/invader only has 2 small bags, and in hand already (see DVD), so the intruder/invader should leave the house very soon .
|8||The criminal fact is " beating" on home intruder/invader.||
(1) It's not "beating" or attack,
defense (legitimate justifiable self-defense by bit pull & push) to save house owner's 90
years-old, suffering heart-failure mother who was attacked by home
The house owner failed to get rid of the home intruder/invader by mild action during intruder/invader's instant attacks (violent words...), because of house-owner's weak health status (having a serious tumor).
(2)According to famous dictionaries e.g., Collins , the term "battery" has meanings: "with the intention of bringing a harmful or offensive contact", "a hostile or offensive manner", obviously, the house owner only intends to save his mother.
|9||the prosecutor chose with no reason one phrase from some of the home intruder/invader's testimony-phrases contradicted to each other.||
The home intruder/invader's testimony (prime accuse) contradicted that of the
phrases by the home
● Firstly : the intruder/invader said the house owner held a chair against the home intruder/invader and punch by fist .
● After one month, the intruder/invader's changed the phrase earlier, and said the house owner waved / swing a small stool to hit the home intruder/invader.
● In the court-room session, the phrase was changed again - the intruder/invader said "the house owner beat and push the home intruder/invader".
Eventually, the prosecutor chose the phrase she prefers or/and believe with no logical reason in her prosecution document - "held a chair against the home intruder/invader and punch this suspect by fist ".
|10||Medical checkup||(1) The home intruder/invader put off the emergency
examination for 21 hours long ― it's
suspicious. The interval time is long enough for anyone to
make minor injury for lots more money than she can earn in
restaurant's kitchen-work. (ref. US movie "the Surrogates")
(2) Report shows Just some small or minor injury : 3 bruises,1 swelling, and with no evidence that who did these (the home intruder/invader is a heavy-work poor laborer in restaurant kitchen, those injury may happen anytime and easily).
|11||Same prosecutor accesses 2 cases sort of contradicted to each other.||"the Crime of Unlawful staying in the Dwelling House of Another Person" leads to "self-defense" (or Bodily Harm) case. Once the prosecutor indicts the latter one, means she probably won't accept "Unlawful staying in another person's house". The prosecutor should transfer another case to some other prosecutor, or the prosecutors office should not assign 2 cases to same prosecutor. (According to news report, there're some other cases are same ― same judge judged same case through 3-layer court sessions, he probably won't deny the correctness of his previous judgment )|
|12||to be continued...|
PS1: CNN, 1.25.2014
Truck Rammed into Presidential Office of Taiwan's Regime in Exile http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-1078129
Around 5 am today in Taiwan, a 41-year-old truck driver rammed his 35 tons heavy gravel truck into the front door of the so-called Presidential Hall of a regime in exile called Republic of China, where the head of the pseudo government works only 20 meters away from the collision site. The driver is now hospitalized and alive, though in critical conditions....The shocking news inspired supporters of Taiwan’s pro-independent movement to have conversations on facebook to start a revolution attempting to solve all problems of widespread injustice and corruption accompanied by worsening economy due to the one-china policies of the current regime’s rule. One of them said, "This is the first canon ball of our revolution to establish a country in our name, Taiwan."
PS2: Taiwan prosecutor's not-indictment document (main part) as below:
Taiwan High Prosecutors Office cancelled the Taipei District Public prosecutor's non-prosecutorial disposition (crime of home invasion - Criminal law, Article 306) and returned this case to another prosecutor of Taipei district prosecutors office for further investigation. It's an unbiased judgment. New prosecutor determined that suspected home-invader did violate Criminal law. (against Article 306 is an unbiased judgment)...
But I don't agree that the High Court concluded slander-words "You are incompetent (useless) !" yelled by the home intruder/invader are "subjective view", and I don't agree High Court concluded this is not the "case of deliberate humiliation" .
I also don't agree that the judge's words in another case (body-harm/ self-defense) "I only buy the medical record (that's it)". In my view, the judge should consider self-defense as well, and the home intruder went to clinics the next day, hence bruises can be faked, the home intruder asked lots of money for a few bruises ... In the US, the home intruder can be shot ! ( to be continued)
No1 ranking on Google by keyword "Taiwan prosecutors", test at 9.9.2016; No.2 ranking on Google by keyword "Taiwan prosecutors", test at 3.11.2014
|ps||This site (intlHumanRights.com & CourageWorld.ch) ranks No.1 on keyword "Taiwan prosecutors"||
More judiciary ranking
records are on the top on the net, click ...
◎ No.1 rankings "human rights in Taiwan" on Yahoo, google, etc (2014) please click ...
◎ world No. 1 rankings in 2015
No.1 ranking on Yahoo (Taiwan) by keyword "Taiwan prosecutors" in English or Chinese (pic. right), test in 2.3.2014
|Taiwan's legal system criticism ★ this site's world No. 1 in 2017, 2016, 2015, 2014, 2013, 2010~12 ★|
Chinese version contact home ©