Print

Mail

wiki links

Editorial: Amnesty may have limited impact

The Executive Yuan has been instructed by President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) to put together a bill granting amnesty to prisoners who are serving terms for minor crimes.

There has even been discussion about implementing the amnesty by May 20, the anniversary of Chen's inauguration.

While there are some merits to the amnesty plan, the government must carefully consider the repercussions it could have.

Immediately after the bill was announced, the pan-blue camp blasted the amnesty as a ploy to win votes in the year-end legislative election rather than a way to give those who have been convicted of minor crimes another chance.

As for the pan-green camp, it cannot be assumed that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) would score any points with voters just because it offered an amnesty.

Only the inmates who would be released from prison early and their immediate families and friends would directly benefit.

Most others would probably feel indifferent or even a bit uneasy at the thought of criminals returning to society.

It should not be forgotten that excessively high crime rates continue to be perceived by most Taiwanese as a serious social problem.

Middle-class families -- the so-called moderate voters that the DPP desperately wants to win over -- rate crime as their single biggest concern.

Making matters worse, the government has not offered any compelling reason for the amnesty.

The first reason put forth -- that it has been 16 years since an amnesty was granted, 20 years since martial law was lifted and 60 years since the 228 Incident -- doesn't hold water.

The 1991 amnesty took place right after former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) became president and was implemented at a time when many Taiwanese were still serving prison terms handed down during the martial law era.

Thus, the 1991 amnesty was granted not only as a way to commemorate the lifting of martial law, but also to free those who had been jailed for speaking out against oppressive one-party rule.

The Chen administration also said its proposed amnesty was targeted at reducing crowding in the nation's prisons.

Unfortunately, some see the burgeoning prison population as a result of the incompetent policies of the DPP administration.

To avoid stirring too much controversy, the Executive Yuan has repeatedly said that only those serving sentences of less than one year for minor and petty crimes would be eligible to receive a reduced sentence or amnesty.

The problem with this is that coming up with a definition of minor and petty crimes is very difficult. Certainly, the victims of crime never view the injustices done to them as minor.

As the government struggles with listing the crimes that are eligible for the amnesty, it removes an increasing number of offenses, reducing its scope.

The result is that the impact of the amnesty will become smaller and fail to accomplish what Chen had hoped for.
This story has been viewed 1573 times.