Taiwanese Lawmakers Clash Over "Ko Wen-je Clauses" on Detention Limits

Proposed revisions to Taiwan's Code of Criminal Procedure, informally known as the "Ko Wen-je clauses," have ignited a fierce debate among lawmakers, primarily concerning the potential reduction of pre-trial detention periods. The amendments, particularly those seeking to shorten detention timelines, have led to accusations of attempting to "force through" legislation without adequate consensus.

“

If this is amended, it is very likely to cause the collapse of our country's criminal investigation.

The core of the controversy lies in shortening the maximum detention period during investigations from two months to one, and during trials from three months to two. Proponents, like Kuomintang legislator Chiu Yi-hsiang, argue that the current system has remained largely unchanged for over a century and that shortening these periods would incentivize investigators and police to expedite their work, preventing detention from becoming a tool for case management rather than a measure against flight risks or evidence tampering.

However, the proposals face significant opposition. Legislators from the Democratic Progressive Party, including Chuang Jui-hsiung, argue that focusing on individual cases or political figures is misguided. They emphasize that detention is a measure of last resort, citing statistics that show a low percentage of requested detentions are actually granted. They also point out that existing issues like leaks of investigative information need separate solutions, rather than undermining the entire judicial investigation system.

“

Detention is not as the outside world imagines, 'seeing a person and arresting them!'

Even some within the Kuomintang, like legislator Wu Tsung-hsien, have expressed reservations, warning that such changes could lead to the "collapse" of criminal investigations in Taiwan. The legislative committee ultimately decided to postpone further deliberation on the contentious Article 108 and other related articles, acknowledging the deep divisions and the need for more discussion, potentially including public hearings, before proceeding.

“

The proposal is not aimed at any specific case or political figure, but is based on the principles of the rule of law and human rights protection, believing that the current detention system is too lenient.