A few days ago, Minister of Justice Morley Shih (
China's system keeps prisoners who've been sentenced to death in jail for two years to give them a chance to repent. Those who do have their death sentences commuted to life imprisonment.
Adopting this system, however, would be taking a step backward, instead of moving along the correct path toward eventually abolishing the death penalty.
China delays the execution of death sentences, but the death penalty remains in place. In other words, courts still have absolute power to deliver final judgment. This would not be the case if capital punishment was replaced by a full-fledged moratorium.
Delaying the execution of a death sentence does not cut down on abuse of capital punishment, nor will it reduce criticism from the outside world.
The ministry's plan to introduce China's system for commuting death sentences to life imprisonment without actually abolishing capital punishment will not stop courts from issuing the death penalty, nor does it move the nation closer to abolishing the death penalty.
Even if the ministry is determined to delay the execution of every death sentence, we feel that retaining the possibility of executing a death sentence goes against the global trend toward abolishing capital punishment.
If getting rid of the death penalty cannot be achieved in one fell swoop, a full-fledged moratorium should be implemented. That is the right step toward gradually eliminating it.
Statistics from the human-rights group Amnesty International show that by the end of last year, 86 nations had abolished the death penalty, 11 nations have abolished the death penalty in times of peace and 25 nations have stopped performing executions. In total, 122 countries have abolished the death penalty in law or in practice, while 74 nations retain and use the death penalty.
In many countries that have done away with the death penalty, abolition was preceded by a period in which use of the death penalty was halted in order to build a public consensus and come up with appropriate supporting measures. Furthermore, there is no evidence to suggest that instituting the death penalty has an impact on social order. Comparisons between US states where the death penalty has been abolished and states that have retained it show no clear cause-and-effect relationship between social order and the existence of capital punishment.
It is very rare for a nation that has stopped performing executions to not go further and abolish the death penalty. Therefore, Amnesty International usually categorizes such nations as having abolished the death penalty in practice.
For example, Hong Kong is one of the few Chinese societies in the world without capital punishment -- Macau is another -- although it took 27 years from the time it stopped performing executions in 1966 until the death penalty was formally repealed in 1993.
Another example is Russia: Former Russian president Boris Yeltsin signed a decree stopping the use of the death penalty in 1996, and his successor, President Vladimir Putin, has continued the policy. After a decade without executions, Russia's legislative body may this year adopt Protocol No. 6 to the European Convention on Human Rights concerning the abolition of the death penalty in times of peace.
Let's return the focus to Taiwan: If the ministry believes that it does not have sufficient administrative power to end executions, it should seek help from President Chen Shui-bian (
Furthermore, if the government recognizes that protecting human rights is a universally valid moral imperative, then abolishing the death penalty should come without any preconditions.
Therefore, repentance should be a condition for parole, not a condition for commuting a death sentence. This is one of the reasons why -- apart from China -- delayed death sentences are not used by any nation wanting to abolish the death penalty.
Ending the death penalty in Taiwan is now seen as something that is easier said than done, and the ministry often evades the issue using public opposition as a pretext.
In fact, in most democracies, including those that have abolished capital punishment, a majority of the public is against removing the death penalty.
Countries that have abolished it have done so for historical reasons -- for example Germany -- or due to pressure from the international community as a result of regional integration -- as in the democratizing countries in Eastern Europe -- but many more countries have done so because of the values of their political elite, for example Western European nations, Canada and many countries in South America.
It is, however, very rare that a country abolishes the death penalty based on public opinion. Just as is the case with many human rights guarantees for disadvantaged groups, eliminating the death penalty may go against the wishes of the majority. Instead, political leaders, including lawmakers, must safeguard the needs of a minority.
Chen and the justice ministry have promised to abolish the death penalty several times as a part of the government's human rights policy. As recently as last September -- when the president received delegates from the International League for Human Rights -- Chen even said that he hoped to reach the goal of zero executions "as soon as possible."
But if Chen really wants to live up to his claim to make Taiwan into a human-rights oriented nation, he must halt the adoption of an ambiguous system to delay death sentences and instead put an end to the execution of death sentences.
Wu Chih-kuang is an associate professor in the School of Law at Fu Jen Catholic University and a vice convener of the Taiwan Alliance to End the Death Penalty.
Translated by Lin Ya-ti
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US