A Study on the Indicators Construction of Judicial Confidence—Cases Analysis of Tax Litigation for Taichung High Administrative Court

• Main Authors: Yu-Wun Lin, 林昱妏
• Other Authors: Yen-Hung Chen
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 2018
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/nsfg6f

碩士 === 國立中興大學 === 國家政策與公共事務研究所 === 106 === As all citizens eagerly wish to strengthen the nation’s judicial confidence, this study aims to tackle this complex issue by looking at the tax litigation for Taichung High Administrative Court and will use two theories in social capital - social confidence and corporal confidence - as the indicative basis to construct judicial confidence. The Delphi method is employed in collecting testimonies from litigation experts, which are analyzed by means of two-dimensional array, to accomplish three main goals: to understand the structural attributes, contents, and indicators for judicial confidence; to obtain objective and feasible indicators for judicial confidence through gathering and analyzing expert testimonies; and to propose concrete proposals to strengthen the nation’s judicial confidence. The study is founded on six aspects: consistency, fairness, honesty, efficiency, aptitude, amicability benevolence. These are then subdivided into 24 indicators. The findings can be categorized in three main areas. First, the indicative structure founded in this study is comprehensive in scope, resulting in differences between expectation and reality concerning the actual implementation of the proposals to strengthen judicial confidence and the degree to which the proposals are practiced. The differences also include conflicts among expert testimonies, rendering a consensus highly unlikely. Second, experts all agree to the indicators brought up in this study, consenting on the equal importance across the complicated indicators. This poses great significance for the eclectic and meticulous nature of all the indicators for judicial confidence. Third, according to the two-dimensional array analysis, three indicators whose significance has been highlighted but whose implementation is found to be unsatisfactory are: the court should treat similar incidents with equal measures; the judges should be trustworthy; and the judges should possess accurate judgement. The study thereby proposes these three points at the top priority for further improvement. This study proposes three further research directions: first, for different judicial litigation cases, the structural aspects and indicators for judicial confidence should be differentiated; second, future researches should augment the research goals and sample size; third, the scope for future research targets can be more expansive and diverse to include, for instance, personnel across national organizations in accounting and taxation. Should the analyses include larger numbers of national tax litigations, the amount and accuracy of information gathered will be greatly enhanced, rendering even more exact indicators for judicial confidence.