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.
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
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
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
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS