Interpretation Services 97. When the judicial police authority is processing cases requiring interpretation services, interpreters act as the only communication channel between the investigators, concerned parties, and others. The interpreters play a critical role in the clarification of facts for the entire case. The substance of interpretations provided by the interpreters is critical to the case and to the concerned parties’ interests and rights, be they freedom, property, or personal rights. The interpreters required by the judicial police authority should be proficient in two languages and also familiar with the related proceedings, terminology, and have competence in evaluating the equivalence of terms in translation. The interpreters are also required to act professionally, fairly, and impartially. The National Police Agency of the Ministry of the Interior is advised to strengthen its evaluation and training mechanism when using interpretation services; they must also pay sufficient remuneration in order to ensure the accuracy and quality of the interpretation service, and maintain the principles of due legal process in a democratic country ruled by law. Forensic Science 98. Concerning the doubts raised by the Judicial Reform Foundation during the past cases against Chiang Kuo-Ching and Su Chien-Ho, among others, evidence was indeed not investigated thoroughly during both the investigations and trials. The judicial personnel appeared to lack competence in determining scientific evidence and were, therefore, unable to verify any omissions. The Judicial Yuan and Ministry of Justice should develop a standard threshold for the efficacy of evidence under forensic science. Upon investigation and subsequent follow-up by the Control Yuan, the Judicial Yuan is currently discussing amendments to the provisions regarding forensic science under the Code of Criminal Procedure. 99. The investigating agency is advised to select expert witnesses, or organizations commissioned to provide expert testimony, independently from those selected or ordered by the court, in order to protect the defendant’s right to confront witnesses. Meanwhile, it is also advised to take the merits of the expert witness system used in the United States into consideration, and to provide the defendant with the right to select the expert witness. In order to prevent excessive commercialization and increasing costs from delayed litigation or abuse of the system, which makes it difficult for the judge to verify the truth, it is advisable to retain expert testimony from a neutral organization. This expert testimony may be exempted from cross-examination, and engaged upon mutual agreement by the judge or concerned parties, in order to protect the concerned parties’ interests in procedure and substantive examination. After investigation and subsequent follow-up by the Control Yuan, the Judicial Yuan is discussing 43