New facts can be re-examined-Libra Legal Network

New facts can be re-examined-Libra Legal Network
New facts can be re-examined-Libra Legal Network

The Legislative Yuan’s Judicial and Legal Affairs Committee is now reviewing the 420 amendments to the Criminal Procedure Law. The Kuomintang legislator Liao Zhengjing, who proposed the proposal, questioned that the current provisions stipulate that “because of the

discovery of new evidence and a full confession of guilt, people shall be innocent, exempt from prosecution, and exempt from punishment. Or a sentence that is lighter than the pleaded guilt in the original sentence can be submitted for a retrial.” However, this rule is harsh and it is difficult

for the public to retrial. Liao Zhengjing said that if there is no retrial system, can Jiang Guoqing and Su Jianhe be rehabilitated? Retrial is a very important mechanism for the people’s judicial relief, but now there are very few opportunities for people to retrial. If the amendment is

completed and “new facts” are discovered, it can also be retrial. This is a major reform and a major advancement in Taiwan’s judicial human rights. Kuomintang legislator Lu Xuezhang also questioned that 99% of retrial cases were rejected by the High Court, only 0. 75% are allowed to

retrial. If the retrial is narrowed down to when people have no way to complain, it will not be effective at all and lose the meaning of retrial. He also supports the inclusion of “new facts” in the amendment of the law. The DPP legislator You Meimei pointed out that Germany passed 2,000

retrials a year, and Taiwan only passed 5 retrials a year. The courts cannot use law-based stability as the principle, but severely restrict the people from initiating retrials and injustice anyone. ” deputy secretary-general of the Judicial Yuan, said in response to the inquiry that the current rule for retrial is that the court discovers the original in the process of verbal debate during the fact

trial. There are errors in the judgment or the new evidence is sufficient to shake the original judgment. The retrial can be made. In 2013, the High Court accepted 1,554 retrial cases and rejected 1,479. The Judicial Yuan agreed in principle to amend the law to include the “new facts”

element. However, Jiang Renxiu said that the requirements for a retrial are strict, and they are the same all over the world. The Judicial Yuan suggested that the text should be revised to include new facts, but the addition of “a separate or comprehensive judgment with previous evidence” is

sufficient to accept the guilty verdict. Only those who are not guilty, exempt from prosecution, or sentenced to a lesser guilt than the original sentence can be brought to trial. Subsequently, after negotiation between the ruling and opposition legislators, the opinions of the Judicial Yuan and

the content of the legislator’s proposal were compromised. The preliminary review passed an amendment clause stating that “the new facts or new facts or facts discovered only after the judgment was found to have existed before the judgment was confirmed. New evidence, alone or

in a comprehensive judgment with previous evidence, can reasonably believe that the person sentenced to be guilty should receive a verdict that is not guilty, exempt from prosecution, or sentenced to a lesser guilt than the original verdict, and may request a retrial.”