COR Point 18 CEDAW Education and Training
With regard to Paragraph 20 of the State report, judicial officers in the trial process for cases of gender violence often are unable to distinguish between sexual assaults between strangers and sexual assaults involving people who know each other. Instead, they often labour under the myth that “when a woman’s body is assaulted, she should shout, resist or immediately report to the police.” Hence, they may easily interpret the lack of such reactions on the part of the person involved as indications that the contact did not violate her will and thus make improper dispositions or verdicts. There are also some judges who maintain that no sexual assault could have taken place if a victim had not immediately exposed the incident, filed a police report or underwent an examination for injuries. For example, Taiwan Supreme Court Judgment No. 1066 in 2015 annulled an original judgement for retrial on the grounds that since the plaintiff reported to the police “this cases does not seem to match with usual cases of sexual assault which are reported promptly to police for action immediately after they occur since she reported the case to police over a day and a half after the time she claimed she was sexually assaulted by the defendant.”
We recommend that the government encourage legal professionals to develop curriculum on CEDAW and other international human rights covenants and conventions, research and develop professional educational material on gender violence based on the standards of CEDAW and other human rights treaties and include related content in national examinations for judicial personnel.
The officers of the Judicial Yuan, including judges, judicial associate officers, family matters investigation officers, mediation commissioners and Gguardians ad Litem, should all have education and training in human rights, CEDAW and gender equality. The Judicial Yuan establish effective evaluation systems to list annual targets for staff training rates and track results and evaluate whether the judiciary is able to manifest human rights and the spirit of CEDAW in indictments, verdicts and the disposition of cases.