Opinion | Year-End Evaluation of the Lay Assessor Act: A Judicial Reconciliation Between "Dinosaurs" and "Legal Illiterates" When "Storytelling" Serves as a Litigative Strategy
Last edited: 2026-11-03
In January of this year, the new Citizen Judges Act system came into effect, sparking considerable discussion. To date, lay assessor trials have resulted in nine completed judgments, including five cases of death resulting from driving under the influence (of alcohol or drugs), three murder cases, and one case of death resulting from assault. Among the murder cases were high-profile societal matters such as the "single mother child-killing case" and the "Chiang woman husband-killing case."
Regarding discussions on these high-profile cases, numerous media op-eds have already been published online, guiding the general public to understand the factual circumstances and legal disputes of these cases while offering institutional reflections and observations on the Citizen Judges Act. Additionally, on October 25, the Alliance for Civil Supervision of the Citizen Judges Act held a press conference putting forward seven recommendations [1] for the lay assessor system, hoping to address the institutional flaws of the Citizen Judges Act with a focus on issues such as "asymmetrical prosecution-defense resources," "sentencing defense strategies," and "the diversity of lay assessors."
Continuing the relevant demands of the Alliance for Civil Supervision of the Citizen Judges Act, this article re-examines the institutional significance of the Citizen Judges Act from the perspectives of judicial trust, litigation strategies, prosecution-defense resources, and the composition of lay assessors, viewing it through the lens of legal culture [2]. From there, it reflects on how institutional reform of the lay assessor system might be possible. This article argues that while reflections on legal culture may not immediately yield effective institutional solutions, pursuing legal culture can guide us in thinking about potential directions for the reform of the lay assessor system.
A Judicial Reconciliation Between Dinosaurs and Legal Illiterates: The Judicial Trust the Lay Assessor System Seeks to Build
The legislative intent of Article 1 of the Citizen Judges Act states: "To have lay assessors drawn and selected from the general public participate in litigation procedures, so as to enhance judicial transparency, reflect the public's legitimate legal sentiment, and manifest the ideal of popular sovereignty."
In other words, the significance of the lay assessor system lies in enhancing judicial transparency, hoping to manifest the ideal of popular sovereignty through public participation in trials. By involving "lay judges" in trials, there is an expectation that common-sense thinking regarding "fact-finding" held by everyday people can be incorporated into the adjudication of major criminal cases. However, the fundamental question is why judicial trials would need the perspective of ordinary people—namely, what the legislative intent terms the "public's legitimate legal sentiment."
This article is an AI-generated translation of the original Chinese text. In the event of any discrepancy, the Chinese version shall prevail.
