The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) today (April 29) released its special report, Equal Access to Justice: Court Interpretation and Court-Appointed Defense Systems in Taiwan, at a press conference. As the number of foreign residents in Taiwan has surpassed one million—meaning that one in every 24 people is now a foreign national—a critical question arises as increasing numbers of individuals from diverse linguistic and cultural backgrounds enter the criminal justice system: Does the current system truly ensure that everyone can understand the proceedings, express themselves, and receive effective legal representation?
The NHRC noted that the right to a fair trial extends beyond formal participation in legal proceedings. More importantly, individuals must be able to genuinely understand and effectively participate in the process. Yet the combination of language barriers and disparities in access to resources may place some people in a position where they appear to be participating while effectively being excluded, reducing the right to a fair trial to a mere formality.
In her opening remarks, Vice Chairperson Chi Hui-jung cited practical examples from legal aid attorneys. One attorney referred to the Te Hung Hsing No. 368 case, in which the defendants were unable to immediately express their intention to surrender when Coast Guard officers boarded the vessel due to language barriers. Although they later admitted their offenses during the voyage back to Taiwan, a legal dispute arose as to whether their conduct qualified as voluntary surrender. She further noted that the case involved a large number of defendants, none of whom understood the language used in court. During the initial hearings, only one interpreter was assigned, resulting at times in discrepancies between the interpretation provided and the understanding of observers attending the proceedings. Chi also pointed to the Taiwanese legal drama and political thriller miniseries Port of Lies, which depicts issues such as defendants' distrust of interpreters and their refusal to use interpreters provided by labor brokers. While such situations may not represent the norm in every case, they reflect broader public concerns regarding the quality of interpretation and legal defense within the justice system.
Turning to the court-appointed defense system, Vice Chairperson Chi explained that Taiwan currently provides multiple forms of legal defense services for disadvantaged individuals, including public defenders, contract defenders, Legal Aid Foundation attorneys, and volunteer defenders. However, she questioned whether this multi-track system truly provides adequate protection or whether it may contain hidden gaps. The key issue, she emphasized, is not whether defense mechanisms formally exist, but whether they are capable of supporting effective legal representation.
She further noted that disparities remain in institutional positioning, resource allocation, and quality oversight. In particular, the lack of institutional independence for public defenders may affect their ability to perform their defense functions effectively, while insufficient regulatory standards governing volunteer defenders make consistent quality control difficult. The State's responsibility, she stressed, should not end with ensuring that defendants have legal representation. Rather, it must ensure that such representation provides meaningful and effective defense. This requires a comprehensive review of legal professional training as well as the structural relationship among judges, prosecutors, and defense counsel.
Addressing the court interpretation system, Commissioner Wang Li-jen emphasized that language comprehension is the starting point of procedural justice, yet the current system remains highly fragmented. Different judicial institutions maintain separate interpreter rosters and operating mechanisms, with little coordination among them, making it difficult to ensure consistent quality. At the same time, effective mechanisms for reviewing and remedying interpretation errors remain lacking. Once such errors occur, the resulting harm to a person's rights is often difficult to rectify in a timely manner.
Commissioner Wang further observed that interpreters have long faced low compensation, inadequate protections, and high-risk working conditions. The instability of the system, in turn, negatively affects both the quality and efficiency of judicial proceedings. She stated bluntly that when language becomes a barrier, the justice system itself may give rise to a form of “invisible discrimination.”
The NHRC explained that the report takes Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) as its core framework, emphasizing that the right to understand legal proceedings and the right to effective legal defense are inseparable. When language barriers and socioeconomic disadvantage coexist, individuals often find it difficult to participate meaningfully in legal proceedings. This, the NHRC noted, represents a structural challenge that current institutions have yet to adequately address.
Based on its analysis, the NHRC has put forward ten recommendations for reform, emphasizing the need for a comprehensive governance approach rather than piecemeal efforts to address individual shortcomings. With respect to court interpretation, the report recommends the enactment of dedicated legislation, the establishment of a national interpretation service system, the integration of fragmented regulations, increased budgetary investment and labor protections, and the adoption of digital technologies to ensure timely and reliable language support throughout all stages of judicial proceedings.
Regarding the court-appointed defense system, the report recommends reassessing the roles and division of responsibilities among different categories of defense counsel, strengthening quality oversight mechanisms, reducing risks arising from institutional dependence, and evaluating the establishment of a more unified system for legal professional training and appointment.
The NHRC concluded by emphasizing that the realization of the right to a fair trial should not depend on an individual's language abilities or economic circumstances. Whether foreign nationals, migrant workers, Indigenous Peoples, or other disadvantaged groups are involved, the State has a responsibility to ensure that they are genuinely understood, heard, and defended throughout criminal proceedings. The NHRC therefore called upon the government to address existing institutional gaps, advance cross-agency reforms, and progressively build a more inclusive justice system that conforms to international human rights standards.