UPDATE: On August 1, 2012 Dr. Shieh received official notice that the prosecution would not seek a third appeal. The case is officially over.
News Release for the Final Verdict of Ching Jyh Shieh
At 10:30AM, July 11, 2012, the Tainan Branch of the Higher Court of Taiwan released a statement upholding the “not guilty” verdict for Dr. Shieh and Mr. Hon Chang Sheu, officially ending the case against them, which has dragged on for more than six years.
This statement ended the Taiwan Prosecution Bureau’s attack on Dr. Shieh, bringing to a legal battle that went all the way to the Supreme Court—Taiwan’s highest court. What began with dubious accusations of corruption, a 59-day long extra-judicial detention of Dr. Shieh, was followed by a trial that ended in a verdict of “not-guilty.” The Prosecution Bureau struck back twice with appeals,* the second of which was made to the Supreme Court. These appeals resulted in two additional trials. Both times, the High Court of Taiwan conducted a period of review and cross-examination, only to reject the Prosecutors’ appeals and uphold the original “not-guilty” verdict. In six years, Dr. Shieh’s was forced to defend his innocence three times in court.**
The final rejection of the Prosecution’s appeals by the High Court indicates that the presiding judges were well convinced and made the unanimous decision that the case should be closed and that all defendants were to be considered innocent and free.
Of note is a new law that passed and came into effect at the beginning of this year which blocks the Prosecution Bureau from appealing any case that has already been acquitted twice. This is meant to protect a defendant from continuous, repeated, and possibly, never-ending, prosecution once he or she has been twice declared “not-guilty.” This law was not passed in time to affect Dr. Shieh’s case, but had it been, his case would have been resolved much earlier, without going on to the Supreme Court.
*A number of other countries legally protect people from “double jeopardy,” or a second prosecution for the same offense. For example, this is provided for in the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
**The second appeal was made by the Prosecution Bureau on July 19, 2011, which launched an indeterminate period of review. During the review period, defendants receive notice to appear in court for preparatory hearings, but they are given no indication of how long the review will last and when the actual court date where both sides will be present to present their arguments and for cross-examination; no details of the procedure are disclosed and the members of the Supreme Court review panel are kept strictly secret. In November 2011 and February 2012, Dr. Shieh was summoned to court for preparatory proceedings. Ten months after the second appeal, Dr. Shieh was finally served a summons to appear at the Tainan High Court on May 30, 2012 for a formal presentation of arguments from both sides. This trial had been ordered by the Supreme Court to “clarify some issues that were unclear to the judges of the higher court, as requested by the Prosecution Bureau.” In this last trial, the defense lawyers argued the issues in question and supplemented their presentation with written submittals.