World Day Against the Death Penalty on Oct. 10, which is sponsored by the World Coalition Against the Death Penalty, is aimed at strengthening international support for the universal abolition of this form of punishment. It is worth noting that Taiwan is one of 22 nations still practicing capital punishment. This seriously damages the nation's human rights record, as well as its image in the international community.
Since coming to power in 2000, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government has claimed on many occasions that it would abolish capital punishment in this country. Unfortunately, it has often used "public opposition" as an excuse for delaying its implementation.
Roger Hood, a UN consultant on the death penalty and human rights, pointed out that "public opinion is frequently cited as a major factor in the decision whether to abolish, retain or reinstate the death penalty. For example, government officials in Japan, countries that were under the jurisdiction of the Soviet Union, China [and] Thailand have all supported the practice of the death penalty and strongly opposed the efforts to abolish it."
"These countries sometimes even claim that people would lose confidence in the rule of law if the efforts to abolish the death penalty were not backed by public opinion," he said. "There are also governments that stress that a nation must respect the will of the public, and that enacting a law to abolish capital punishment disregards public opinion and is undemocratic."
If any attempt to end capital punishment is considered undemocratic, why is it that most countries that strongly oppose the abolition of capital punishment are not democratic countries? Democratic countries in the EU have all abolished the death penalty. Therefore, whoever attempts to use public opinion to oppose the abolition of capital punishment needs a deeper understanding of what exactly public opinion is.
Many academics well versed in public attitudes toward the death penalty recognize that opinion polls on the death penalty issue are problematic, especially those that use the simple question: "Would you favor the idea of abolishing the death penalty?"
First, public opinion poll questions can be far too simplistic. Often there is only one question on whether or not the respondent wants to abolish the death penalty. In fact, the public view of the issue is quite complex. The outcome is usually very different if another type of question on the death penalty is included in an opinion poll.
Second, the results of a public opinion poll usually reflect spur-of-the-moment responses from the respondents, who have mostly not been given full information related to the issue. That is, the public do not possess the relevant knowledge to answer the question.
Third, public opinion is changeable and is changing right now. If public opinion changes, then using public opinion to dictate a decision regarding the death penalty would be problematic.
Fourth, governments and the media can manipulate public opinion. If a government is strongly opposed to the abolition of the death penalty, it will use the results of a simplified opinion poll to strengthen that position, thus manipulating public opinion in its favor.
Fifth, a policy to abolish the death penalty affects public opinion. The majority of the public in many countries were still opposed to abolishing the death penalty even while their government was on the verge of taking capital punishment off the books. Nevertheless, public opinion changed after the decision was made and implemented.
According to a survey the Academia Sinica conducted in June, Taiwanese hold complex views on the abolition of the death penalty. When asked if they would favor the abolition of the death penalty, 76 percent of the respondents said they were opposed to the idea, while only 21 percent said they agreed. But when asked if the death penalty could be replaced with life imprisonment without parole, 53 percent of respondents expressed approval, while 44 percent disapproved.
Furthermore, 62 percent of respondents said that if a death row inmate has behaved well, his or her sentence could be commuted from death to life in jail or long-term imprisonment, while 35 percent opposed the idea.
These findings reflect the public's complex feelings about the death penalty. Therefore, the government should work to better understand and interpret public opinion polls on the abolition of the death penalty, rather than simply asserting that most Taiwanese oppose such a cause.
At the very least, a majority of the public support the idea of life imprisonment or the suspension of the death penalty.
This shows that a majority of the public would accept the abolition of the death penalty under certain conditions. If the concerned authorities can only come up with a complementary set of plans to deal with the issue, then abolishing the death penalty in this country will no longer be such a daunting task.
Chiu Hei-yuan is a research fellow at the Institute of Sociology at Academia Sinica and convener of the Taiwan Alliance to End the Death Penalty.
Translated by Daniel Cheng
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing