The recent death of an infant, due to alleged abuse by a caregiver in Taipei, has caused widespread public anger.
Aside from the caregiver, a social worker from the Child Welfare League Foundation (CWLF), who was responsible for providing guidance for the child’s well-being, was detained on suspicion of forgery and negligent homicide. However, when the police put the woman in handcuffs, her treatment sparked protests.
The main reason for this was not the detainee’s status, but the use of restraining devices, which must strictly adhere to the presumption of innocence and the principle of proportionality.
Another aspect worthy of closer consideration is whether the attribution of criminal liability for the child’s death should include the social worker.
If anyone other than the caretaker is to be held responsible for the child’s death, it could only be someone who was in the position of a guarantor — that is to say, someone who had a duty to do whatever was necessary to prevent the child’s death.
Since the social worker was responsible for providing guidance and visiting the premises, she had a duty to protect the child who was placed in the caregiver’s home and prevent any physical or mental harm from being done to the child.
So, if the social worker failed to visit the premises and check whether the child was being abused, that could well be a case of negligence in the sense of “not noticing things that should have been noticed.”
If this was the reason the social worker was unable to detect and report the abuse early enough, which ended in a tragedy, then it would seem that she should bear criminal responsibility for negligence and inaction leading to the death of a person.
However, given that the social worker had no official authority, how often and how thoroughly did she need to visit the foster home to fulfill her duty?
Even if the social worker is found to have not fulfilled her duty to effectively monitor the situation, when one considers that the child’s death was caused by the caregiver’s abuse, the causal relationship between the social worker’s inaction and the child’s death is open to dispute.
If it is impossible to prove a cause and effect relationship, then — based on the principle that reasonable doubt should work in favor of the accused and the fact that criminal law only punishes negligence if it results in actual harm — the social worker’s inaction would be unpunishable negligence.
The obstacles that criminal law places in the way of holding the social worker responsible for negligent homicide demonstrate criminal law’s principle of moderation.
They also demonstrate that the blame for the child’s death should not be borne solely by the social worker, especially considering Taiwan’s serious social worker shortage.
It would be fairer for the blame to be put on CWLF and competent authorities who have a duty to supervise such situations.
The fact that criminal law does not recognize “complicity” in negligence or that a corporate entity could be the subject of a crime, would make it even more difficult to pursue criminal charges against the people in charge of the corporate entity or the officials of the relevant government departments.
It would therefore only be possible to pursue their civil liability and seek state compensation. However, pursuing such a case would be a long, slow slog for the victim’s family.
Wu Ching-chin is a professor in Aletheia University’s Department of Law and director of its Criminal Law Research Center.
Translated by Julian Clegg
Taiwan’s semiconductor industry gives it a strategic advantage, but that advantage would be threatened as the US seeks to end Taiwan’s monopoly in the industry and as China grows more assertive, analysts said at a security dialogue last week. While the semiconductor industry is Taiwan’s “silicon shield,” its dominance has been seen by some in the US as “a monopoly,” South Korea’s Sungkyunkwan University academic Kwon Seok-joon said at an event held by the Center for Strategic and International Studies. In addition, Taiwan lacks sufficient energy sources and is vulnerable to natural disasters and geopolitical threats from China, he said.
After reading the article by Hideki Nagayama [English version on same page] published in the Liberty Times (sister newspaper of the Taipei Times) on Wednesday, I decided to write this article in hopes of ever so slightly easing my depression. In August, I visited the National Museum of Ethnology in Osaka, Japan, to attend a seminar. While there, I had the chance to look at the museum’s collections. I felt extreme annoyance at seeing that the museum had classified Taiwanese indigenous peoples as part of China’s ethnic minorities. I kept thinking about how I could make this known, but after returning
What value does the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) hold in Taiwan? One might say that it is to defend — or at the very least, maintain — truly “blue” qualities. To be truly “blue” — without impurities, rejecting any “red” influence — is to uphold the ideology consistent with that on which the Republic of China (ROC) was established. The KMT would likely not object to this notion. However, if the current generation of KMT political elites do not understand what it means to be “blue” — or even light blue — their knowledge and bravery are far too lacking
Taipei’s population is estimated to drop below 2.5 million by the end of this month — the only city among the nation’s six special municipalities that has more people moving out than moving in this year. A city that is classified as a special municipality can have three deputy mayors if it has a population of more than 2.5 million people, Article 55 of the Local Government Act (地方制度法) states. To counter the capital’s shrinking population, Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an (蔣萬安) held a cross-departmental population policy committee meeting on Wednesday last week to discuss possible solutions. According to Taipei City Government data, Taipei’s