The Constitutional Court on Tuesday last week held a debate over the constitutionality of the death penalty. The issue of the retention or abolition of the death penalty often involves the conceptual aspects of social values and even religious philosophies.
As it is written in The Federalist Papers by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and John Jay, the government’s policy is often a choice between the lesser of two evils or the greater of two goods, and it is impossible to be perfect.
Today’s controversy over the retention or abolition of the death penalty can be viewed in the same way.
UNACCEPTABLE
Viewing the situation in Taiwanese society and weighing the pros and cons, if the death penalty were to be completely abolished, the vast majority of Taiwanese would find it difficult to accept such a decision emotionally.
If a person is so brutal and vicious that their humanity is extinguished, then the state’s public power might be justified in inflicting the death penalty, which is in defense of the righteousness of the heavens, in line with the world’s laws and order and in keeping with the religious purpose of advising people to follow virtue.
If the possibility of a “miscarriage of justice” is a concern, then we should appropriately strengthen the system by improving the procedures of trial and execution.
In the design of the criminal legal system, the death penalty should be used sparingly or not at all, but such a penalty should not be completely abolished. Many countries that are advanced in democracy and the rule of law, such as the US and Japan, have not abolished this kind of penalty yet, so we can learn from them.
In our criminal legal system, the death penalty is no longer the only punishment for certain major crimes, as the law has been amended to “death penalty or life imprisonment” — known as the “relative death penalty” (相對死刑). This gives judges some room for discretion in light of the circumstances of each case. As for future improvement of the legal procedures involved in the death penalty, it can remedy the flaws pointed out by supporters of its abolition.
This is exactly something that the government can still work on.
Looking at current practice in the judicial system, judges quite often regard the “possibility of correction” as a “gold standard of death exemption” (免死金牌) for defendants in major crimes.
Such a myth in law enforcement leaves the victims dead, with injustice unredressed and the surviving family members unconvinced.
How can we do justice to the rights of victims, and how can we satisfy the legal sentiments of good people?
PRISON CAPACITY
As far as the law is concerned, “possibility of correction” is not grounds for exemption from the death penalty, not to mention that it is an uncertain concept.
Moreover, if the death penalty is really replaced by life imprisonment, such a replacement would not only cost taxpayers money to support the prisoners for a lifetime, but also take up more space in prisons.
It is no wonder that prisons are always overcrowded, making it difficult to manage them, resulting in numerous problems and even expanding the number of prisons across Taiwan.
What a shame for the country.
Hsu Wun-pin is the honorary chair of the Chinese Association for Human Rights.
Translated by Eddy Chang
After nine days of holidays for the Lunar New Year, government agencies and companies are to reopen for operations today, including the Legislative Yuan. Many civic groups are expected to submit their recall petitions this week, aimed at removing many Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers from their seats. Since December last year, the KMT and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) passed three controversial bills to paralyze the Constitutional Court, alter budgetary allocations and make recalling elected officials more difficult by raising the threshold. The amendments aroused public concern and discontent, sparking calls to recall KMT legislators. After KMT and TPP legislators again
In competitive sports, the narrative surrounding transgender athletes is often clouded by misconceptions and prejudices. Critics sometimes accuse transgender athletes of “gaming the system” to gain an unfair advantage, perpetuating the stereotype that their participation undermines the integrity of competition. However, this perspective not only ignores the rigorous efforts transgender athletes invest to meet eligibility standards, but also devalues their personal and athletic achievements. Understanding the gap between these stereotypes and the reality of individual efforts requires a deeper examination of societal bias and the challenges transgender athletes face. One of the most pervasive arguments against the inclusion of transgender athletes
When viewing Taiwan’s political chaos, I often think of several lines from Incantation, a poem by the winner of the 1980 Nobel Prize in Literature, Czeslaw Milosz: “Beautiful and very young are Philo-Sophia, and poetry, her ally in the service of the good... Their friendship will be glorious, their time has no limit, their enemies have delivered themselves to destruction.” Milosz wrote Incantation when he was a professor of Slavic Studies at the University of California, Berkeley. He firmly believed that Poland would rise again under a restored democracy and liberal order. As one of several self-exiled or expelled poets from
EDITORIAL CARTOON
RSS