This article examines rape trials from the perspective of feminist jurisprudence. Due to privacy concerns, it has long been the policy of the Taiwanese Judicial Yuan to deny the public access to the verdicts of rape trials. Despite the good intentions of the Judicial Yuan, the policy also prevented the courts from outside scrutiny. In 1999, under the pressure of women's rights groups, the Taiwanese Legislature amended the rape law. The new law was designed to conform to the ideals of feminist movements in Taiwan. Due to the privacy restriction, although it has been more than ten years since the major amendment of the Criminal Law Statute, the legal academia knows little about the new law's impact on women's rights. With the assistance of the National Science Council and help from the Judicial Yuan, I was granted permission to gain access to the official verdict database. It is my intention to use this opportunity to review whether the courts have fulfilled their obligation, under the law, to create an environment of gender equality and to diminish the use of unfair gender stereotypes. This article is divided into four parts: the first part is the introduction; the second part provides the theoretical basis used to review court verdicts; the third part is an analysis of the court verdicts; and the final part is the conclusion.
|Translated title of the contribution||What Constitutes Reasonable Doubt? A Feminist's Perspective on Taiwanese Rape Trials|
|Original language||Chinese (Traditional)|
|Number of pages||50|
|State||Published - Jun 2012|
- Feminist Jurisprudence
- Verdict Study
- Gender Stereotyping