People commonly think the ultimate goal of the judicial system is to convict the guilty, and release the innocent. However, in Taiwan , there are always some people who have long been stuck between the verges of these two, waiting for a definite answer to their fate. Years after years they wait, but all their time spent is in vein.

Delay in criminal procedure has always been a pain in the back of Taiwanese judicial system, and it's also criticized by the international community as falling behind the international human rights standard. But what's so wrong with taking some time? Doesn't that make the court more careful in reaching its decision? In this article, I try to point out the grave infringement of human rights delayed procedure may cause on criminal defendants, how Taiwan is falling behind the international standard in this aspect, and whether the newly enacted “Speedy Trial Act” can solve the problem.

Speaking of delayed criminal procedure, we've got numerous perfect example here in Taiwan, such as the Hsichih Trio ( 蘇建和三死囚案 ), Chiou Ho-shun case( 邱和順案 ), etc, each of which has been in trial for more the twenty years, and has not yet been finally decided. And these are only the tip of the iceberg, it's simply common in Taiwan for criminal cases to proceed on for years yet still get no decision. To provide a clearer image, I will take the Hsichih Trio case for example. The accused in the first case had just graduated from high school when they were arrested, but by now they are already in their mid-thirties. They have spent the most precious time in their life waiting for an answer to their times wasted in vein. However, the answer is still nowhere to be found.

I believe it's of vital importance for legal practitioners to understand that the judicial process, such as arrest, interrogation, detention, trial, and etc, can itself put one's basic human rights at risk. When the government start accusing a person, his/her fundamental right to live a normal life is at risk. He/she might have to face interrogation, his/her house or workplace might be searched, and worst of all, he/she might be taken into custody. All these actions will put the accused under not only mental distress, but also social pressure. People tend to think that police don't come to anyone for no reason, those who are suspected must have done something wrong. Therefore, once suspected, it's highly probable that one may lose his/her job, friends, and his/her whole life. Moreover, in cases of serious or gruesome crimes, the Media tend to direct its attention quickly to whoever is picked out, making the society more hostile against the accused. The longer this process takes, the longer the accused suffers.

The major goal of all the actions taken against the accused is to discover the truth. However, exceedingly-long judicial process may lead toward the opposite. Years after years, the memories of witness may fade away, and evidences may be damaged, or even disappear. If no enough evidence is secured at the early age of trial, there is little hope, if not no hope at all, that time will bring up some decisive evidence that can close the case. Therefore, there is no benefit in the government's delaying the case, and therefore gives the government an obligation to close the case within a reasonable time.

Nevertheless, as we compare Taiwan to the rest of the world, we find it unsatisfactory in this aspect. Let's take Europe for example. In Europe, criminal cases going on for 5 years is normally considered to be violating the European Convention on Human Rights, while in Taiwan, it's common to see cases lingering for 10 years or more. There are even cases that haunt Taiwanese judicial system for more than 20 years, and are not yet decided.

Recently, Taiwanese people has seen the enactment of the “Fair and Speedy Criminal Trial Act ( 刑事妥速審判法 ).” It is believed to be the authority's effort trying to meet the international standard of criminal procedure laid down in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), as the covenant puts in its Article 14, “ Everyone charged with a criminal act should be entitled to the following minimum guarantees… 3. To be tried without delay. “ However, is the Act the perfect cure to the lingering issue? Or does it simply trade the accused's rights for a quick end? It is still under question.

To me, I think the core to this problem is the presumption of innocence, which is to say that everyone should be presumed innocent unless convicted guilty by law. So if the government cannot prove one guilty within a reasonable time, rather than let the procedure carry on, the government should choose nothing but to announce the accused innocent. The government should not forget that its goal is not to discover the truth at all costs, when the truth seems impossible to be found, it should turn to protect its civilian whom it once alleged guilty.

Again, since the presumption of innocence also tells us to bear in mind that every accused should be deemed innocent before convicted guilty, they don't deserve to endure the interference the judicial process has on their lives. Neither should they tolerate indefinite detention that continues for years after years. Let's remember that everyone, good or bad, guilty or innocent could be seated before the court on the defendant's seat. Unless we can prove on solid ground that they are guilty, we've got no legitimate basis to punish them, and to subject them to indefinite imprisonment. After all, they are not always our foe, They could be ordinary people, just like you and me.