Judge Gender and Hierarchy in Judgments of Sexual Assault Cases in Taiwan

• In Event: Comparative Courts & Legal Systems Mini-Conference: Democracy, Autocracy, and Institutional Change

Abstract

Unlike in American courts, Taiwanese judges in panels have unequal and disproportionate power in practice because of exogenous factors such as social hierarchies and seniority, though by law, they should receive the same authority. In some cases for Taiwanese courts, section chief judges hold more power than the other two judges because they reside the authority to evaluate the other judges in the same section. Associate judges may have disproportionally less power than presiding judges in panels because of unequal power dynamics and asymmetrical information distribution. Additionally, judicial hierarchies may affect the outcome judgments. We argue that female judges give longer-term sentences than male judges for severe sexual assault cases, such as rape. There is no difference between male and female judges in comparatively minor sexual assault cases, such as sexual harassment cases. However, female presiding judges give shorter-term sentences than male judges for severe sexual assault cases, such as rape. We also find that female section chief judges are inclined to grant defendants commuted sentences. In short, a judge's gender affects the judgments of sexual assault cases. However, gender holds different effects in different hierarchical positions.

Authors

• Chin-shou Wang, National Cheng Kung University

• Shun Min Wang, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University