Chen Zhixiang has now retired as a lawyer.

(File photo, photo by reporter Lin Jiadong)

[Reporter Wu Zhengfeng/Taipei Report] When Chen Zhixiang (retired), a former judge of the Keelung District Court, was in office in 2016, he appeared on a program to explain the reasons for the judgment of a case. Good (C)".

Chen Zhixiang was deeply concerned about the Kao Bing case, and filed a lawsuit to clean up the stains, but was dismissed by the professional court a few days ago.

Since 2016, Chen Zhixiang has served as a professional court judge. He served as the appointed judge in the retrial case of Chen Hongbin, a former judge of the Taipei High Administrative Court, who was involved in molesting a female assistant. The dismissal of part-time court judges sparked heated discussions.

Chen Zhixiang decided to go on the show to explain the reasons for the change of sentence, and he accepted media interviews 8 times, hoping to settle the controversy.

Please read on...

The Job Evaluation Committee of the Keelung District Court determined that Chen Zhixiang's speech was inappropriate, and initially evaluated his performance in 2018 as "not good enough", which was evaluated by the dean of the Keelung District Court and approved by the President of the Judiciary Xu Zongli.

Chen Zhixiang was dissatisfied and filed for a re-examination. The Vocational Evaluation Committee of the Basic Academy found that the review was justified and re-evaluated it as "good".

After deliberation in 2020, the Judicial Yuan’s Job Evaluation and Appraisal Committee found that Chen Zhixiang’s speech was inappropriate and violated the judge’s law and judge’s ethics. The Judicial Yuan’s Personnel Review Committee also supervised and sanctioned Chen Zhixiang’s written warning in 2020. The decision was based on Article 6, Item 3, Subparagraph 7 of Article 6 of the Vocational Evaluation Measures "violation of duty obligations, disrespectful words and deeds, and it is inappropriate to consider it as good in the evaluation" should be relisted as "not good" and reported to Xu Zongli for approval .

Chen Zhixiang was dissatisfied, and argued that the decision of the council approved by Xu Zongli affected the independence of the trial, and filed a lawsuit hoping to clear up the stain.

Chen Zhixiang explained that the previous and subsequent actions of the Judicial Yuan were all judicial administration taking the opportunity to interfere in the trial, and it was nothing more than announcing to the outside world that if there are judges like him who are disobedient and unwilling to accept their wishes, the result will be a warning and a post. The evaluation was not good, and at least nearly 400,000 yuan in evaluation bonuses were lost.

He emphasized that the speeches in the media did not exceed the content of the judgment, misleading metaphors or lack of awareness of sexual equality.

The duty court pointed out that it is difficult to consider that the collegiate panel judges accepting radio or television interviews and publishing letters to the media in order to respond to or refute comments from all walks of life on their own judgments are part of the scope of judicial work.

In particular, after a judge has made a judgment, he accepts interviews with the news media and publicly defends his judgment without the authorization of the collegial panel or beyond the scope of authorization.

The duty court stated that Chen Zhixiang only accepted media interviews intensively in order to defend his judgment after the outside world discussed the judgment of the case for several days, but failed to prove that he had the consent or authorization of the collegial panel.

Since Chen was not authorized by the collegial panel, the Judicial Yuan determined that he "as a trial judge of a professional court, but when interviewed by the media, his remarks exceeded the content of the judgment, and his quotations were inappropriate, and he lacked awareness of sexual equality, which damaged the neutrality and objectivity of the judges. , impartial image", and the job evaluation has not reached a good level, and it is difficult to think that it will affect the independence of the trial.

To sum up, the job court found that the Judicial Yuan did not interfere with the independence of the trial, and Chen Zhixiang's lawsuit was groundless, so it was dismissed recently and he can appeal.

The case was heard by the fourth division of the first instance of the disciplinary court's duty court, and the members were presiding judge Wu Sanlong, judge Ning Xin, and judge Lin Huiyu.