Case News

The TCC delivers its Judgment 112-Hsien-Pan-12 (2023)

    TAIPEI, October 18, 2023. The Taiwan Constitutional Court (TCC) delivered its Judgment of the "Case on the Admissibility of Out-of-Court Statements made by Witnesses before the Police" on August 4, 2023.

Principal Facts, Issues, and Procedure of the Case

    Article 159-3 of the Code of Criminal Procedure stipulates that "Statements made in the investigation stage by a person other than the accused to the public prosecuting affairs official, judicial police officer, or judicial policeman may be admitted as evidence, if one of the following circumstances exists in trial and after proving the existence of special circumstances indicating its reliability and its necessity in proving the facts of criminal offense: (1) The person died (Subparagraph 1);…;(3) The person cannot be summoned or has failed to respond to the summons due to the fact that …whereabouts are unknown (Subparagraph 3)…."

    Petitioners I to V of this case were all found guilty in their respective criminal cases in which the witnesses who made statements against them were either dead, could not be summoned or failed to respond to the summons because their whereabouts were unknown. In these cases, the court deemed that although the witnesses were unavailable to be cross-examined and confronted by the defendants at trial, their statements taken by police outside the court were particularly reliable and necessary in proving the offense, thus admissible under Article 159-9, Paragraphs 1 or 3 of the Criminal Code.

    After exhausting all remedies, Petitioner I to V filed for constitutional reviews respectively. Their cases were later consolidated by the Court. The petitioners mainly argued that Article 159-3, Paragraphs 1 or 3 of the Criminal Code allowed out-of-court statements to be admitted as evidence without being confronted and cross-examined by the defendant in court, consequently violating their right to due process and right to institute legal proceedings guaranteed by Articles 8 and 16 of the Constitution. In addition, Petitioners IV and V also motioned for preliminary injunctions to halt their executions. 

    Judgment 112-Hsien-Pan-12 (2023) was announced on August 4, 2023. Justice Tzung-Jen TSAI wrote this Judgment. Justice Sheng-Lin JAN (joined by Justice Jiun-Yi LIN) and Justice Tai-Lang LU each filed a concurring opinion. Justice Jau-Yuan HWANG (joined by Justice Ming-Yan SHIEH) filed a dissenting opinion. 

Decision of the Court

    The TCC upheld the constitutionality of the disputed provisions. The TCC emphasized that the disputed provisions constituted no violation of due process and the rights to judicial remedy under Articles 8 and 16 of the Constitution, so long as (1) the defendant is given a balanced right to confrontation during trial; (2) the not confronted, not cross-examined, out-of-court statement cannot be admitted as the only or decisive evidence for the crime (the need for corroboration). 

    The TCC denied the preliminary injunctions requested by Petitioners IV and V. 
 

Notes:

1. Full texts of the Judgment and Opinions are available on the TCC website at here (Traditional Chinese). An English summary of this Judgment will be available later on the TCC English website.
2. The TCC's Case News is prepared by the Department of Clerks for the Constitutional Court (Judicial Yuan) for information only and does not bind the Court. 
3.  In case of any conflict of meaning between the Traditional Chinese version and the translated English version, the Traditional Chinese version shall prevail.