News
In legal proceedings, the transparency and continuity of the Trial Panel are prerequisites for ensuring the fairness of a judgment. A common but serious error occurs when members of the Lay Assessors are changed, yet the trial continues instead of starting over. This is a severe violation of litigation procedures, leading to a high risk of judgment annulment at the appellate level.
According to current regulations, specifically Article 288 of the Criminal Procedure Code 2015 and Article 233 of the Civil Procedure Code 2015, a trial must be conducted continuously with the same Trial Panel established from the opening.
Replacement Mechanism: Members of the Trial Panel may only be replaced if there are alternate members who have attended the trial from the beginning.
Mandatory Requirement: If there are no alternate members for replacement, or if the new member has not directly witnessed the proceedings from the start, the trial must be retried from the beginning.
Allowing a new Lay Assessor to participate solely by reading files or listening to reports directly violates trial principles:
Principle of Directness: The new member does not directly hear the interrogation or observe the psychological reactions of the parties in court. Indirect evidence through records can never replace actual live proceedings.
Principle of Objectivity in Deliberation: The Trial Panel's decision is based on the results of the oral arguments in court. A member lacking a full grasp of the trial's progression will compromise objectivity when voting on the verdict.
The consequences of this error extend beyond procedural issues to actual damages for the parties involved:
Annulment of First-Instance Judgment: Superior courts (Appellate or Cassation levels) will certainly annul the judgment due to serious procedural violations.
Wasted Time and Resources: The case must start again from scratch after months or even years of pursuit.
Increased Costs: Litigants incur additional court fees and legal expenses resulting from the retrial.
