The evolution of the right to counsel in Taiwan

The primary statute governing criminal procedure in the Republic of China (ROC; unofficially, “Taiwan”) is the Code of Criminal Procedure (CCP), whose roots can be traced back to 1906. ¹ Taiwan’s criminal procedure did not, until recently, strongly emphasize the right to counsel – a defendant’s right to be represented by a lawyer in a criminal investigation and trial. Generally, it was believed that an innocent person did not need counsel because he was innocent and so law enforcement and the courts would reach that conclusion and release or acquit him. A guilty person did not need a lawyer either, it was thought, because as a perpetrator he did not need to be represented by a counsel to be acquitted. Thus it was long believed that the innocent did not need and the guilty did not deserve to have access to counsel in criminal proceedings. The historical influence of Chinese culture also de-emphasized the importance of lawyers. In the past, judges heard cases as if they were parents, not arbitrators resolving disputes between parties. Harmony was highly valued and litigation was not encouraged. Consequently, defense lawyers, who raised issues and argued for people against the state were usually ignored and people’s rights to counsel were disregarded.