The Taiwan High Courts ruling that a traffic officer provide evidence to explain why he issued a ticket for running a red light to a female motorcyclist went against the courts custom of accepting police testimony as absolutely credible in traffic violation cases.

The National Police Agency stressed that it respected the ruling but noted that it is sometimes difficult to collect evidence to prove alleged traffic violations, noting that not all intersections are equipped with a traffic camera.

Stressing that traffic police cannot predict whether or where someone might run a red light, NPAs traffic division director Ho Kuo-jung reportedly noted that if police are required to submit evidence in support of every ticket they issue, they would be unable to issue any traffic tickets.

Despite the difficulty the ruling may bring to police in their efforts to crack down on traffic violations, the case highlighted the fact that police credibility is ultimately based on a premise that they exercise their authority cautiously and follow all the legal and correct procedures.

Judges in the court ruling emphasized that not all traffic police testimony should be considered be untrustworthy, citing that the female motorcyclist, Chen Jung-chi （陳榮吉）, was mistaken for a suspect in the shooting death of an innocent driver on March 15 because of a highway policemans false testimony.

Judges believe that police who have access to traffic cameras should be held responsible for providing evidence of alleged traffic violations before giving citations. They stressed that policemen should not be granted discretionary power in issuing traffic tickets.

The high court concluded that since policeman Lin Hsin-heng could not provide any other evidence to prove Chens alleged red light violation, a district court should take action to reevaluate the credibility of the ticket.

Moreover, the high court found that Lin did not write the ticket for Chen at the scene, rather he issued it after returning to the police bureau.

Lin had also written that "Chen stressed she did not violate any law and refused to sign the ticket for riding without a license but has been made aware of related regulations," on the ticket.

The high court emphasized that since Chen did not receive the ticket at the scene, it was impossible for her to make a refusal to sign it, and further requested an investigation as to whether Lin committed perjury and forgery.

Expressing his dissatisfaction over the ruling, Lin stated, "She （Chen） did not show her license to me. I actually saw her running a red light but I can not present any photo or hard evidence to the court."

Ho admitted that Lin should not have issued the ticket for riding without a license to Chen at the police bureau, and emphasized that the high courts ruling should be taken as a warning to police to follow guidelines when issuing traffic tickets.

The case occurred at around 5:00 a.m. on July 7 last year. Chen insisted she did not run a red light and said she refused to sign the ticket for running the red light, but two tickets - one for running the red light and another for driving without a license- were later sent to her.

The Taipei District Court had previously ruled that the traffic ticket issued to Chen for riding without a license should be rescinded as Chen actually holds a valid license but that Chen should still be fined for running a red light based on Lins testimony.

Chen appealed the district courts ruling that fined her for running the red light, and the Taiwan High Court later ruled in her favor.