Amid deeply worrying trends in judicial affairs, the Ministry of Justice’s preparations to abolish the death penalty next year come across as an enlightened, if bizarre, exception.
The good news would be that if a miscarriage of justice resulted in the heaviest penalty for an innocent defendant, that person would at least have much more time to fight back. The bad news for many victims of crime would be the trading of retributive justice for a more humanitarian approach to punishment — and the knowledge that the worst murderers and the most destructive of drug dealers and others would not be killed for their crimes.
One such victim is Pai Ping-ping (白冰冰), a TV entertainer and actor whose life was devastated in 1997 when her daughter Pai Hsiao-yen (白曉燕) was kidnapped, held for ransom, mutilated and killed.
It is one of the most notorious murder cases in Taiwan’s history, but Hsiao-yen’s death was only the beginning. A farcical police investigation — law enforcement agencies spying on each other, an officer taking credit for another officer’s shooting of a suspect, reckless weapon use and other Keystone Cops antics — only ended when the lead suspect surrendered after invading the home of a South African military attache and taking his family hostage.
Ever since, Pai Ping-ping has been a trenchant supporter of the death penalty. Today, with the justice ministry on the verge of withdrawing the punishment, she has spoken out, warning that she might form a political party and study law in order to be able to personally conduct executions. If a majority of Taiwanese supported abolition, she said, she would commit ritual suicide.
There may yet be political capital in such language; curious eyes would then turn to who would bankroll her tilt for political power, and indeed whether she is sustained by something other than years of suffering and ferocious righteous indignation.
With enough pomp and money, Pai could be elected to the legislature via the “legislator at large” system based on the national proportion of the vote. All it would then come down to is whether she could distract enough voters from bread-and-butter issues and convince them that Taiwan should aggressively reactivate processes of capital punishment.
Of equal interest is the possibility of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government being embarrassed by a celebrity and former supporter of the opposition who endorsed President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) in 2008. The timing was no accident: Ma’s Democratic Progressive Party rival, former premier Frank Hsieh (謝長廷), served as a negotiator during the siege at the attache’s house, which earned him Pai’s unrelenting hatred, even though his actions probably helped save the lives of the attache’s family.
Pai Ping-ping has no understanding of how the Ministry of Justice has corroded the nation’s justice system under the watch of Minister Wang Ching-feng (王清峰). For her, what matters is that the death penalty be retained and that “true justice” be handed down to the guilty — regardless of the competence of judges, the ethics of prosecutors, the erosion of the rights of the defendant and his or her legal team and the influence of the media in high-profile cases.
Pai’s message is cynical and authoritarian. However, because of her tragic experience, few have had or will have the courage to stand up to her and say that she is peddling drivel. But the unspoken fact remains: While suffering usually attracts sympathy, it does not necessarily confer wisdom.
In the first year of his second term, US President Donald Trump continued to shake the foundations of the liberal international order to realize his “America first” policy. However, amid an atmosphere of uncertainty and unpredictability, the Trump administration brought some clarity to its policy toward Taiwan. As expected, bilateral trade emerged as a major priority for the new Trump administration. To secure a favorable trade deal with Taiwan, it adopted a two-pronged strategy: First, Trump accused Taiwan of “stealing” chip business from the US, indicating that if Taipei did not address Washington’s concerns in this strategic sector, it could revisit its Taiwan
The stocks of rare earth companies soared on Monday following news that the Trump administration had taken a 10 percent stake in Oklahoma mining and magnet company USA Rare Earth Inc. Such is the visible benefit enjoyed by the growing number of firms that count Uncle Sam as a shareholder. Yet recent events surrounding perhaps what is the most well-known state-picked champion, Intel Corp, exposed a major unseen cost of the federal government’s unprecedented intervention in private business: the distortion of capital markets that have underpinned US growth and innovation since its founding. Prior to Intel’s Jan. 22 call with analysts
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) challenges and ignores the international rules-based order by violating Taiwanese airspace using a high-flying drone: This incident is a multi-layered challenge, including a lawfare challenge against the First Island Chain, the US, and the world. The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) defines lawfare as “controlling the enemy through the law or using the law to constrain the enemy.” Chen Yu-cheng (陳育正), an associate professor at the Graduate Institute of China Military Affairs Studies, at Taiwan’s Fu Hsing Kang College (National Defense University), argues the PLA uses lawfare to create a precedent and a new de facto legal
Chile has elected a new government that has the opportunity to take a fresh look at some key aspects of foreign economic policy, mainly a greater focus on Asia, including Taiwan. Still, in the great scheme of things, Chile is a small nation in Latin America, compared with giants such as Brazil and Mexico, or other major markets such as Colombia and Argentina. So why should Taiwan pay much attention to the new administration? Because the victory of Chilean president-elect Jose Antonio Kast, a right-of-center politician, can be seen as confirming that the continent is undergoing one of its periodic political shifts,
RSS