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.
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,