On April 23, the Constitutional Court began deliberating the death penalty. Whether it is constitutional is to be determined by the end of July at the earliest.
One Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislator said that nearly 80 percent of people in Taiwan oppose abolishing the death penalty and revealed the names of the nine chief justices who are in support of abolishing it.
Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) caucus whip Ker Chien-ming (柯建銘) said that abolishing the death penalty should depend on the social consensus.
How people view this issue should be taken into consideration as well.
Even lawmakers from the same party differ on whether to retain or abolish the death penalty.
Although his party supports abolition, DPP Legislator Wang Shih-chien (王世堅) said that it is equivalent to depriving victims of their right to seek justice. Nobody outside a legal or murder case is qualified to forgive an offender on behalf of a victim.
Issues pertaining to the death penalty have drawn much attention among the public and have led to severe divisiveness and conflicts between supporters and opponents.
Most candidates during election season keep their mouths shut regarding this topic for fear of losing votes if anything they propose does not align with the electorate’s sentiments.
Some candidates even take advantage of death penalty issues to attack their political opponents.
The issues and relevant problems are highly associated with criminology.
Different criminologists say whether certain facts are tied to moral judgements depends on different interpretational stances.
DETERRENCE
Penalties are used as a form of deterrence. It is essential that punishments and their proportionality increase the possibility of deterring would-be criminals or copycats through fear of punishment.
REHABILITATION
The biggest purpose of a punishment is to make offenders turn over a new leaf and start behaving in a better way.
RETRIBUTIVE JUSTICE
Retributive justice proponents believe that whether a person has committed a crime, and the degree of their criminal behavior is a matter of morality.
People in Taiwan have not reached a consensus on the death penalty; human rights and mainstream opinion conflict with one another.
How can a compromise be reached? What could be more important than human rights?
Taiwanese should take the two questions into consideration and have a more meaningful and critical conversation on the issue.
The death penalty has been much discussed in Taiwan for a long time.
In 1990, Interpretation No. 264 — which says the death penalty is constitutional — sparked debate among supporters and opponents of the capital punishment. Interpretation No. 476, issued in 1999, also determined the death penalty to be constitutional.
Before the justices decide on the constitutionality of the death penalty, people should do nothing but respect them and the spirit of judicial independence and the rule of law.
However, the Judicial Yuan is still responsible for reviewing the topic of abolishing the death penalty, clarifying whether people who commit certain crimes should be given a death sentence or not after its constitutionality is determined.
Knight Chang is a political worker and doctor of education.
Translated by Hsieh Yi-ching
The return of US president-elect Donald Trump to the White House has injected a new wave of anxiety across the Taiwan Strait. For Taiwan, an island whose very survival depends on the delicate and strategic support from the US, Trump’s election victory raises a cascade of questions and fears about what lies ahead. His approach to international relations — grounded in transactional and unpredictable policies — poses unique risks to Taiwan’s stability, economic prosperity and geopolitical standing. Trump’s first term left a complicated legacy in the region. On the one hand, his administration ramped up arms sales to Taiwan and sanctioned
The Taiwanese have proven to be resilient in the face of disasters and they have resisted continuing attempts to subordinate Taiwan to the People’s Republic of China (PRC). Nonetheless, the Taiwanese can and should do more to become even more resilient and to be better prepared for resistance should the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) try to annex Taiwan. President William Lai (賴清德) argues that the Taiwanese should determine their own fate. This position continues the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) tradition of opposing the CCP’s annexation of Taiwan. Lai challenges the CCP’s narrative by stating that Taiwan is not subordinate to the
US president-elect Donald Trump is to return to the White House in January, but his second term would surely be different from the first. His Cabinet would not include former US secretary of state Mike Pompeo and former US national security adviser John Bolton, both outspoken supporters of Taiwan. Trump is expected to implement a transactionalist approach to Taiwan, including measures such as demanding that Taiwan pay a high “protection fee” or requiring that Taiwan’s military spending amount to at least 10 percent of its GDP. However, if the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) invades Taiwan, it is doubtful that Trump would dispatch
World leaders are preparing themselves for a second Donald Trump presidency. Some leaders know more or less where he stands: Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy knows that a difficult negotiation process is about to be forced on his country, and the leaders of NATO countries would be well aware of being complacent about US military support with Trump in power. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would likely be feeling relief as the constraints placed on him by the US President Joe Biden administration would finally be released. However, for President William Lai (賴清德) the calculation is not simple. Trump has surrounded himself
RSS