When Deputy Minister of Justice and state prosecutor-general nominee Huang Shih-ming (黃世銘) told recent a hearing that all the convicts on death row should be executed, it is safe to assume that he had no idea how much trouble his statement would cause.
The first victim of the ensuing commotion was his then-boss, former minister of justice Wang Ching-feng (王清峰), who was forced to resign a few days later after coming under pressure over a statement that she did not intend to carry out any executions during her tenure.
Since then, debate has raged on the issue of capital punishment. One of the first acts of new Minister of Justice Tseng Yung-fu (曾勇夫) was to order a review of the cases of all death row inmates, with Tseng implying that any inmates whose guilt was confirmed would likely be executed.
Now it appears the resumption of executions — something that is looking increasingly likely — after an unofficial five-year moratorium may have even more far-reaching ramifications, including the possible delay of Taiwan’s long-held goal of visa-free travel status for the EU.
This would certainly seem to be the case following a hastily arranged meeting on Thursday between the EU’s top representative to Taiwan and Cabinet officials where they “exchanged views on capital punishment.”
The government and the new justice minister could do worse than listen to the reasoned opinion of the country’s European partners rather than giving in to the irrational blood-lust of a few attention-seeking politicians and public figures, whether such a move has public support or not.
While politicians and those in high office never miss an opportunity to tout Taiwan as a “human rights respecting” member of the global community, these people have to realize that if Taiwan wants to be taken seriously it needs to live up to these claims and play by the rules — rules that equate respecting human rights with the end of state-sponsored executions.
Taiwan can’t have its cake and eat it.
For far too long, almost every politician in this country has been willing to ignore capital punishment while falling back on the old chestnut that abolition will have to “wait until a public consensus is reached” on the odd occasion this emotive issue rears its ugly head — safe in the knowledge this will not happen.
While there continues to be majority support for capital punishment in Taiwan — a survey in the wake of Wang’s resignation found three-quarters of respondents against its abolition — there have not been crowds of people protesting for the resumption of executions since they were halted in 2005.
The execution of violent criminals may give victims’ families a feeling of retribution and a sense that justice has been done, but it achieves little else, as countless studies have shown that capital punishment does not act as a deterrent.
People should be even more cautious in their support, as many of those on death row have been convicted on the flimsiest of evidence.
The sooner more people become aware of these facts, the better. If, as so often seems the case, people really do care about how Taiwan is viewed by the rest of the international community, then a serious, hyperbole-free discussion with a view to reaching that long awaited consensus should take place — preferably before the next bullet is fired.
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
RSS