Judicial Reform Foundation Calls for Institutionalizing Judge Assistants' Drafting of Judgments to Alleviate Overwork
The Judicial Reform Foundation held a press conference on June 4, pointing out that judge assistants are often tasked with drafting judgments, a practice not officially in their job description, and calling for its institutionalization to improve professional division of labor and reduce judicial overwork.
📋 Article Processing Timeline
- 📰 Published: June 4, 2026 at 12:30
- 🔍 Collected: June 4, 2026 at 12:42 (12 min after Published)
- 🤖 AI Analyzed: June 6, 2026 at 16:12 (51h 30m after Collected)
(Central News Agency, reporter Wang Yang-yu, Taipei, June 4) The Judicial Reform Foundation stated today that while drafting judgments is not part of a judge assistant's official duties, in practice it has become a core task for some assistants. In some cases, judges have even outsourced the entire process to assistants, prompting the Foundation to call on all institutions to prioritize the labor rights of assistants and institutionalize the practice of assistants drafting judgments.
Judicial Reform Foundation Chairman Huang Hsu-tien, Managing Director Lin Yung-sung, Deputy Executive Director Lu Cheng-yen, and lawyer Tsai Hsueh-yi held a press conference at the Legislative Yuan today titled "Implementing Professional Division of Labor, Improving Judicial Overwork – Promoting the Institutionalization of Judge Assistants Drafting Judgments," where they made the above proposals.
The Foundation noted that according to relevant regulations, drafting judgments is not part of a judge assistant's current duties. However, in practice, it has become a core task for many assistants. Some judges have even handed over entire case files to assistants, allowing them to form their own opinions and draft judgments, which are then directly used as the official ruling. This method of assigning work, the Foundation argues, amounts to outsourcing trial work and must be strictly prohibited.
Deputy Executive Director Lu Cheng-yen pointed out that proposing the institutionalization of assistants drafting judgments, in the context of reducing the judicial burden, is not about increasing assistants' workload to lighten judges' load, but rather about enabling different professionals in the court to achieve a proper division of labor, making the entire system more efficient.
To broaden the discussion and protect the labor rights of judge assistants, participants raised several demands, including the establishment of a supporting operational mechanism for assistants drafting judgments, and a call for the Judicial Yuan to address assistants' labor rights, emphasizing that reform should not be built on the sacrifice of grassroots workers.
Regarding the institutionalization of assistants drafting judgments, the Foundation suggested amending the Court Organization Act to explicitly include drafting judgments as part of an assistant's duties. It also proposed amending the Regulations for the Selection, Training, Management, and Evaluation of Judge Assistants to require that when a judge instructs an assistant to draft a judgment, the judge must provide the key points of the ruling and the reasoning behind their conclusion. The assistant should record these points and reasoning, and retain a complete edit history of the judgment in an electronic format that can be verified by a third party. (Editor: Su Zhi-zong) 1150604
Judicial Reform Foundation Chairman Huang Hsu-tien, Managing Director Lin Yung-sung, Deputy Executive Director Lu Cheng-yen, and lawyer Tsai Hsueh-yi held a press conference at the Legislative Yuan today titled "Implementing Professional Division of Labor, Improving Judicial Overwork – Promoting the Institutionalization of Judge Assistants Drafting Judgments," where they made the above proposals.
The Foundation noted that according to relevant regulations, drafting judgments is not part of a judge assistant's current duties. However, in practice, it has become a core task for many assistants. Some judges have even handed over entire case files to assistants, allowing them to form their own opinions and draft judgments, which are then directly used as the official ruling. This method of assigning work, the Foundation argues, amounts to outsourcing trial work and must be strictly prohibited.
Deputy Executive Director Lu Cheng-yen pointed out that proposing the institutionalization of assistants drafting judgments, in the context of reducing the judicial burden, is not about increasing assistants' workload to lighten judges' load, but rather about enabling different professionals in the court to achieve a proper division of labor, making the entire system more efficient.
To broaden the discussion and protect the labor rights of judge assistants, participants raised several demands, including the establishment of a supporting operational mechanism for assistants drafting judgments, and a call for the Judicial Yuan to address assistants' labor rights, emphasizing that reform should not be built on the sacrifice of grassroots workers.
Regarding the institutionalization of assistants drafting judgments, the Foundation suggested amending the Court Organization Act to explicitly include drafting judgments as part of an assistant's duties. It also proposed amending the Regulations for the Selection, Training, Management, and Evaluation of Judge Assistants to require that when a judge instructs an assistant to draft a judgment, the judge must provide the key points of the ruling and the reasoning behind their conclusion. The assistant should record these points and reasoning, and retain a complete edit history of the judgment in an electronic format that can be verified by a third party. (Editor: Su Zhi-zong) 1150604