I recently read an article published in the Liberty Times (the Taipei Times’ sister newspaper), in which author Dino Wei (魏思源) suggests that life sentences without parole could be a complementary measure to the abolition of the death penalty.
The French penal code was amended in 1994 so that criminals facing life imprisonment are required to wait 30 years before they have the right to apply for parole — the required waiting period had previously been 20 years. This law initially applied only to prisoners who were convicted of raping or murdering children.
However, in 2011, the scope of its application was expanded to include those convicted of killing public officials in the line of duty — such as gendarmes, police officers, soldiers and prison guards.
After a series of terrorist attacks in Paris, a new law was passed in 2016 that expanded the scope of this regulation to include all acts of terrorism — a policy also adopted by the UK.
In reality, it is difficult to imagine that any member state of the Council of Europe — all of which have signed and ratified the European Convention on Human Rights — would completely strip people sentenced to life in prison of any hope of parole.
The most crucial step to improve existing criminal law is to raise the upper term limits for fixed-term imprisonment and cumulative punishments for multiple crimes. Currently, the upper limit is 15 years for fixed-term imprisonment and a cumulative sentence is 30 years. Taking murder as an example, a judge can only hand down either a fixed-term sentence of 10 to 15 years, life imprisonment or the death penalty.
Now that the death penalty has been effectively frozen, a judge dealing with a serious murderer is left with only two options — a 15-year prison sentence or life imprisonment. A sentence of 15 years for murder would be an insufficient punishment, while life imprisonment might be too harsh a punishment in some situations.
Regarding cumulative sentences for multiple crimes, the Criminal Code treats fixed-term imprisonment and life imprisonment as fundamentally different, operating under the assumption that changes in quantity cannot produce changes in quality. Therefore, for crimes such as repeated sexual assault or child sexual abuse — even if the announced verdict adds up to a cumulative sentence of 100 years — only 30 years of the sentence can be implemented.
Additionally, current law states that first-time offenders must serve at least half of their fixed-term sentence before they may apply for parole. Thus, a prisoner given the maximum 30-year cumulative sentence can apply for parole after only 15 years — an extremely unreasonable outcome. I recommend that the upper limit for fixed-term prison sentences be increased to 30 or 40 years, while the threshold for parole applications of lifetime prisoners remains at about 25 years.
Increasing the threshold for parole applications of lifetime prisoners to 30 years is the equivalent of one 60-year fixed-term sentence. This should be a severe enough punishment to maintain a general preventative function.
Serious offenders are often subject to all kinds of repression and concealment. The public’s ignorance toward prisoners is something of a social custom, along with a collective mentality that prisoners should be kept isolated from society.
Taiwan should consider using different means — such as non-institutional alternative treatment and social prevention — to discourage recidivism and promote recovery. Such measures would be more conducive to developing a balanced environment that encourages social reintegration for offenders while considering the interests of victims.
Chao Hsuey-wen is an assistant professor.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
Trying to force a partnership between Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) and Intel Corp would be a wildly complex ordeal. Already, the reported request from the Trump administration for TSMC to take a controlling stake in Intel’s US factories is facing valid questions about feasibility from all sides. Washington would likely not support a foreign company operating Intel’s domestic factories, Reuters reported — just look at how that is going over in the steel sector. Meanwhile, many in Taiwan are concerned about the company being forced to transfer its bleeding-edge tech capabilities and give up its strategic advantage. This is especially
US President Donald Trump’s second administration has gotten off to a fast start with a blizzard of initiatives focused on domestic commitments made during his campaign. His tariff-based approach to re-ordering global trade in a manner more favorable to the United States appears to be in its infancy, but the significant scale and scope are undeniable. That said, while China looms largest on the list of national security challenges, to date we have heard little from the administration, bar the 10 percent tariffs directed at China, on specific priorities vis-a-vis China. The Congressional hearings for President Trump’s cabinet have, so far,
The US Department of State has removed the phrase “we do not support Taiwan independence” in its updated Taiwan-US relations fact sheet, which instead iterates that “we expect cross-strait differences to be resolved by peaceful means, free from coercion, in a manner acceptable to the people on both sides of the Strait.” This shows a tougher stance rejecting China’s false claims of sovereignty over Taiwan. Since switching formal diplomatic recognition from the Republic of China to the People’s Republic of China in 1979, the US government has continually indicated that it “does not support Taiwan independence.” The phrase was removed in 2022
US President Donald Trump, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth have each given their thoughts on Russia’s war with Ukraine. There are a few proponents of US skepticism in Taiwan taking advantage of developments to write articles claiming that the US would arbitrarily abandon Ukraine. The reality is that when one understands Trump’s negotiating habits, one sees that he brings up all variables of a situation prior to discussion, using broad negotiations to take charge. As for his ultimate goals and the aces up his sleeve, he wants to keep things vague for
RSS