Japanese Colonial Period
- Publication Date：
- Last updated：2021-01-08
- View count：265
| Year | Date | Events |
|---|---|---|
| 1895 | 10.7 | The “Taiwan Soutokufu Court System” was issued via the Japanese order, and the term “court” was used to call the judicial unit. There was no designated personnel set up for attorney investigation or prosecution affairs. |
| 11.20 |
The Taiwan Soutokufu's Court, which had begun to operate, determined that a designated person can act as a prosecutor to handle prosecutorial affairs in order to comply with the provisions of the Japanese criminal procedure regarding the attorney investigation. |
|
| 1896 | 5.1 | The Taiwan Soutokufu issued the Ordinance No. 1 “Taiwan Soutokufu's Court Regulations”, and the “Taiwan Soutokufu's Court” was established accordingly and started operating on July 15, 1896. At the same time, the position of prosecutor was established, and the judge and prosecutor were both appointed by the Taiwan Soutokufu (Articles 4-5 and 7). (It was when the prosecutorial system was officially established in Taiwan.) |
| 1898 | 7.19 | The Taiwan Soutokufu's Court Regulations was amended. Article 9 of the Regulations stated that “The courts should establish procuratorial offices. The procuratorial offices are directly under the Taiwan Soutokufu, and their jurisdiction is the same as that of the courts. Prosecutors are set up in the procuratorial offices.” Article 11 stipulated: “Head prosecutor should be set up in each procuratorial office. ...Head prosecutors supervise the affairs of the prosecutial offices.” |
| 1899 | 5.14 | The “Taiwan Soutokufu's Court and Prosecutor Affairs Charter” was issued via order, and it specifically implemented to implement the principle of the Unity of Prosecutorial Organ. According to the Charter, the power that the head prosecutor had on judicial judgment of individual cases was much greater than the president of “court”, that is, when the prosecutor was to determine whether to prosecute, especially for political cases, they must take the commands of the head prosecutor. The appeal shall be in the name of the head prosecutor (meaning that appeal must have the consent of head prosecutor). For matters such as the transfer of jurisdiction, or making of the opinion of exempt from prosecution or jurisdictional error at the end of trials shall also be under the command of the head prosecutor. |
| 1901 | 5. | Ordinance No. 4 stated that in order to enable the prosecutors to preserve evidences and get a hold of the accused timely, the rights of seizure and detention would be granted by the pre-trial judge in the pre-trial proceedings in Japan to the prosecutor, but if not prosecution was not made within 20 days, the accused shall be released. Since then, the prosecutors in Taiwan had the “Right of Compulsory Measure” in the investigations. |
| 1905 | 7.29 | Ordinance No. 10 regulated the “Special procedures for criminal proceedings”, reaffirming that the prosecutor may request a pre-trial or a direct court judgment on a felony, and had the right of compulsory measure on human as well as objects (Articles 1-2 and 5). |