Statement by the Judicial Reform Foundation Regarding Legislative Members Suspected of Interfering in the Judiciary

According to news reports, when Presidential Office Secretary-General Mark Chen served as a legislator two years ago, he summoned Bureau of Investigation Director-General Yeh Sheng-mao to the Legislative Yuan to "explain" the exit ban imposed on Li Heng-lung in connection with the SOGO case. The legislators present also included You Ching and Wang Sing-nan of the Democratic Progressive Party, and Chen Chin-hsing and Lin Cheng-yi of the People First Party. Furthermore, You Ching and Ch'en Chin-hsing were members of the Judiciary and Organic Laws and Statutes Committee at the time, raising suspicions of "lobbying on an ongoing judicial case" and sparking controversy over legislators "interfering in the judiciary."

Our Foundation has never spared any effort in criticizing anyone who improperly interferes in the judiciary in any form, let alone when legislators—under the guise of public duty, grandly adopting the form of "reporting to the Yuan," and even including members of the Judiciary Committee who fail to avoid the appearance of impropriety—participate in interfering with ongoing individual cases. If the aforementioned allegations that these honorable legislators "intervened in individual cases and interfered in the judiciary" are true, this Foundation solemnly issues its strongest condemnation against the implicated legislators. We believe that those who disregard judicial justice and national dignity are no longer fit to hold any public office in the nation. Anyone who still draws a government salary, regardless of whether they still hold the position of legislator, should immediately apologize and resign to show accountability!

Therefore, this Foundation calls upon Mark Chen and the named legislators to come forward and clarify the truth, and the Legislative Yuan should also initiate an investigation to provide clarification to the public.

If legislators, particularly members of the Judiciary Committee, truly believe that the current legal framework concerning exit bans is largely incomplete and "concerns human rights," then based on their sacred duty to speak for the people—whereby "the higher the rank of the person stepping forward, the better"—they could comprehensively prompt the executive branch to adjust policies or amend legal systems, which would be a blessing for all citizens. However, this is obviously distinct from caring merely about an "individual case"!

Therefore, in summary, unless legislators can prove through meeting records or other clear evidence that they were indeed "speaking for the people" and "reviewing current systems comprehensively," if it turns out they merely "acted upon entrustment," "intervened in an individual case," and consequently "interfered in the judiciary," they naturally deserve the harshest criticism and condemnation. Beyond personal accountability, the Legislative Yuan must also investigate and respond to demonstrate its determination to safeguard judicial dignity.