An incident in which a personal trainer allegedly attacked police officers in a Taoyuan convenience store before being subdued and allegedly struck 12 times by an officer has sparked discussions about police brutality, and whether the officer involved should be reprimanded.
On Saturday last week, a muscular, shirtless man surnamed Chu (朱) entered a convenience store in Jhongli District (中壢) and allegedly began acting erratically, talking to himself and knocking over product displays. Following up on a call from a store clerk, two police officers arrived and asked the man to leave.
Chu became enraged and allegedly struck both officers in the face and neck, causing a mild concussion to one and bruises on the other. Videos of the altercation posted online showed Chu squatting, flexing his muscles and roaring, prompting some Chinese-language media to dub him the “Taiwanese Hulk.”
One video showed that while Chu was sitting outside the store after he was pepper sprayed, an officer hit him with a baton 12 times, causing Chu to curl up on the ground. The man appeared to be wailing, without fighting back, and blood could be seen on his face and chest when he was handcuffed by the other officer.
Taoyuan Police Department’s Jhongli Precinct said that as the officer, surnamed Wang (王), allegedly lost control of his emotions and used “excessive force,” he was given two demerits and would be charged with assault.
Wang’s actions triggered widespread discussion over whether he was enforcing the law and protecting himself or was using excessive force. Some questioned whether demerits and criminal charges would discourage police from doing their jobs.
A person who said they were a police officer from another Jhongli Precinct station on Wednesday wrote on Facebook that they would launch a “passive public security” campaign from Thursday next week to Sunday. During the campaign, officers would not investigate crimes, give traffic tickets or complete tasks assigned by the precinct to show their disappointment over the police department’s response to Wang.
Based on the Criminal Code, Chu used threats or violence against public officials performing their duties, and under the Police Power Exercise Act (警察職權行使法), officers are permitted to bring a person under control using handcuffs or other approved physical restraining devices, such as while facing violent acts or fighting that could result in injury or other risks that cannot be prevented without restraint.
If the officers had used their batons appropriately to subdue Chu during the assault, the law might protect Wang’s actions, but Wang allegedly beat Chu after he had been subdued, while the other officer stood by and watched. Those actions could be illegal “retaliation” and “assault” on a civilian, who was no longer endangering them or others, nor resisting restraint or detention.
It is understandable for people to empathize with frontline police officers and the risks they frequently encounter. However, they are law enforcers who are given powers they can exercise within the law, and should minimize infringements upon people’s rights. They should use these powers to safeguard citizens’ rights, and maintain public order and social security. They are not the enforcers of punishment.
While self-defense is vital for police, police departments should enhance human rights aspects of law enforcement education, so that officers act in accordance with the law, to protect themselves and others, which can also foster public trust and confidence in the police, gaining them the respect and support they need to perform their duties.
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then