The Asian Human Rights Court Simulation (AHRCS) in October issued its judgement in the case of Chiou Ho-shun (邱和順) v. Republic of China (Taiwan).
The AHRCS was sponsored by former Justice of the Constitutional Court of Taiwan Hsu Yu-hsiu (許玉秀) and coorganized by National Chiao Tung University’s Institute of Technology Law, along with several non-governmental organizations in Taiwan.
The judgement held that domestic courts failed to fulfill their obligation and responsibility to ensure Chiou’s right to a fair trial and basic human rights. The judgement called on the Supreme Court of Taiwan for proper judicial remedy and prompt rectification.
Chiou has been a death-row inmate for nearly three decades. In 1988, he was charged with murdering a female insurance agent named Ko Ho Yu-lan (柯洪玉蘭) and a six-year-old boy named Lu Cheng (陸正). In 2011, his verdict became final after 11 trials.
In 2007, the Legal Aid Foundation and attorneys Lin Yong-song (林永頌) and Yu Po-hsiang (尤伯祥) read Chiou’s case file and believed him to be innocent.
Subsequently, a legal team, hosted by Yu and organized by the Judicial Reform Foundation, was bolstered by many more volunteer lawyers passionate about the case.
Last year, the team applied for the AHRCS hearing.
The legal team is now calling for President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) to grant Chiou amnesty.
The reason is simple: The AHRCS reflects the convergence of the nation’s old and contemporary judiciaries.
In the past, under the authoritarian regime of Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), the criminal justice system systemically violated human rights and due process, while at present, it is progressing toward true rule of law.
Yet, Chiou’s case is a vestige of the old regime. As Yu concluded in his closing argument at the AHRCS: Chiou’s 4.52m2 prison cell is like a time capsule, in which the lifetime of an innocent man and the failure of the authoritarian judiciary is frozen forever.
As Saint Augustine is purported to have said: “In the absence of justice, what is sovereignty but organized robbery?”
If President Tsai is proud of our shared values of democracy, freedom and respect for human rights, then she should grant amnesty.
We can demonstrate our strength, not weakness, in admitting our mistakes; we can show that the government not only wields a sword to punish, but also a mirror to reflect; we can prove that the government’s power can shield our citizens from the failures of the judiciary-of-old.
Regrettably, justice might at times be delayed, but justice should never be denied. Following the AHRCS, the time to act is now.
Huang Yu-zhe is an undergraduate in Soochow University’s Department of Political Science and a former executive secretary of Chiou Ho-shun’s Judicial Reform Foundation legal team.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS