OctOBER 10 was the World Day Against the Death Penalty. So far, 90 countries around the world have formally abolished the death penalty, and more than 40 no longer carry out capital punishment in practice.
The EU and all its member states are firmly opposed to the death penalty. The death penalty is considered incompatible with the principle of human rights, which is a fundamental pillar of the EU.
This year, the World Day Against the Death Penalty falls during the Swedish presidency of the EU. Sweden and the EU attach great importance to this issue and have long taken a strong position regarding worldwide abolition of the death penalty.
In many European countries, public opinion was not in favor of abolition at the time it was implemented. Today, however, it would be unthinkable to reintroduce the death penalty in any country of the EU, and there is no serious debate on that prospect in any member state.
The EU is opposed to capital punishment in all cases and under all circumstances.
HUMAN DIGNITY
First, we believe that the abolition of the death penalty is essential to protect human dignity and to the progressive development of human rights.
Second, the death penalty is irreversible. All available evidence shows that miscarriages of justice exist in all countries, no matter how many safeguards are in place to minimize the risk.
Third, there is no evidence to support the deterrent value of the death penalty. Most countries in Europe have had the death penalty at some time in their history. This being the case, we have extensive experience and have thoroughly studied the subject: There is no evidence to suggest that serious violent crimes increased after the abolishment of the death penalty.
Taiwan is much admired in Europe for its vibrant democracy and the vast improvements in human rights that have taken place since martial law was lifted in 1987. The example of Taiwan is often seen as a source of inspiration for others to follow.
Taiwan has seen two peaceful and orderly transfers of power as a result of democratic, free and peaceful elections. Taiwan has a free media, and open debate prevails. NGOs play an increasingly important role in society and protests can be peacefully organized for almost any cause. It is widely recognized that progress has been made in the legal process.
With regard to the death penalty, it is encouraging to note that no execution has been carried out in Taiwan since 2005. The penal code has been amended. Today, the death penalty is among the possible sentences for a limited number of crimes, unlike before.
UNRESOLVED
Nevertheless, the basic issue remains unresolved and the death penalty is still part of the legal system in Taiwan.
Furthermore, there are still numerous prisoners on death row and the death penalty continues to be meted out by the courts.
On the occasion of the World Day Against the Death Penalty, the EU appeals to all states that still have the death penalty to abolish it.
This appeal is also being made here in Taiwan, and in making it I have the support of all my colleagues from the EU here in Taipei.
We reiterate our call, made in previous years, for Taiwan to take the necessary steps to formally abolish the death penalty and commute the sentences of those who are on death row.
Henrik Bystrom is head of the Swedish Trade Council in Taipei.
A gap appears to be emerging between Washington’s foreign policy elites and the broader American public on how the United States should respond to China’s rise. From my vantage working at a think tank in Washington, DC, and through regular travel around the United States, I increasingly experience two distinct discussions. This divergence — between America’s elite hawkishness and public caution — may become one of the least appreciated and most consequential external factors influencing Taiwan’s security environment in the years ahead. Within the American policy community, the dominant view of China has grown unmistakably tough. Many members of Congress, as
The Hong Kong government on Monday gazetted sweeping amendments to the implementation rules of Article 43 of its National Security Law. There was no legislative debate, no public consultation and no transition period. By the time the ink dried on the gazette, the new powers were already in force. This move effectively bypassed Hong Kong’s Legislative Council. The rules were enacted by the Hong Kong chief executive, in conjunction with the Committee for Safeguarding National Security — a body shielded from judicial review and accountable only to Beijing. What is presented as “procedural refinement” is, in substance, a shift away from
Taiwan no longer wants to merely manufacture the chips that power artificial intelligence (AI). It aims to build the software, platforms and services that run on them. Ten major AI infrastructure projects, a national cloud computing center in Tainan, the sovereign language model Trustworthy AI Dialogue Engine, five targeted industry verticals — from precision medicine to smart agriculture — and the goal of ranking among the world’s top five in computing power by 2040: The roadmap from “Silicon Island” to “Smart Island” is drawn. The question is whether the western plains, where population, industry and farmland are concentrated, have the water and
The shifting geopolitical tectonic plates of this year have placed Beijing in a profound strategic dilemma. As Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) prepares for a high-stakes summit with US President Donald Trump, the traditional power dynamics of the China-Japan-US triangle have been destabilized by the diplomatic success of Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi in Washington. For the Chinese leadership, the anxiety is two-fold: There is a visceral fear of being encircled by a hardened security alliance, and a secondary risk of being left in a vulnerable position by a transactional deal between Washington and Tokyo that might inadvertently empower Japan
RSS