Asia is home to 60 percent of the world’s population whilst being the site of 85 to 95 percent of the world’s executions. Of the 11 nations in Southeast Asia, all but the Philippines, East Timor and Cambodia continue to retain the death penalty. Even Japan, which one would consider to be the closest example of a wealthy liberal democracy, still has more than 100 inmates languishing on death row.
At the extreme of that spectrum lies China, which is the single largest contributor to the number of executions in Asia, if not the world.
This puts Taiwan on the cusp. On Tuesday next week, the Constitutional Court is set to review the constitutionality of the death penalty.
This is a welcome move, as it has been more than a decade since Taiwan signed on to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights during the tenure of former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九).
At the heart of the treaty is Article 6, which stipulates the right to life, serving as an important reminder that signatory states are obliged to work toward the abolition of the death penalty.
Taiwan has often touted itself as being a beacon not only of democracy, but also of human rights within the region. In addition, it has come to gain international renown through its oft quoted diplomatic tagline “Taiwan can help.”
This is where Taiwan could really live up to its ambitions of “helping out.”
It could stand out as a shining example to all its neighbors within the region and even the world that despite the geopolitical pressures it faces, its institutions — especially its courts — are free and strong enough to resist what some politicians have touted as being the public will when the issue of abolishing the death penalty is raised.
In the past few months, politicians have been quick to quote surveys which state that Taiwanese are overwhelmingly supportive of retaining capital punishment.
However, there has been very little attention paid to the 2021 survey published by UK-based Death Penalty Project, which showed that an overwhelming number of legislators interviewed were for the abolishment of the death penalty.
These legislators were unable to reveal their positions, as it would spell political suicide.
Another survey by the very same organization in 2019 revealed that Taiwanese were amenable to the abolition of the death penalty if presented with alternatives and that they were wary of the possibility of mistrials in capital cases.
The death penalty thus is kept alive in a feedback loop with misconceptions from the public as well as elected officials feeding into each other.
Therefore, the courts seem to be the only other available option to let this issue rest once and for all.
Countries in the region which have done away with the death penalty were for a very long time under the thumb of authoritarian governments. The death penalty in the Southeast Asian region cast a wide net, where not only murderers were executed, but dissidents and activists.
In that sense, the death penalty in Taiwan’s history, given its authoritarian past, was used not only to maintain social stability, but also as a weapon against those the regime deemed to be “bandits.”
It is time, given Taiwan’s democratic progress and its commitment to human rights, that it should be brave enough to let go of the past and walk into a future free of state-sanctioned killing.
Leong Kar Yen is an associate professor in the Department of Global Politics and Economics at Tamkang University. He does comparative research on the death penalty in Taiwan and Southeast Asia.
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