Think about the victims
I would like to respond to Michael Tsai’s letter (Letters, March 14, page 8) on the death penalty. It is filled with fallacious arguments and incredible insensitivity.
First, as is customary, he assures us that he empathizes “with families who have suffered great pain,” as if a few empty words are at all helpful to families devastated and destroyed by murderers. Does he think his empty words are any consolation? Instead of concentrating his letter on the victims, he spends most of his time trying to protect killers from rightful execution resulting from a sentence passed by the judicial system, as well as ignoring the wishes of the people of Taiwan, who support capital punishment in overwhelming numbers (over 70 percent). But then, democracy and the rule of law can be so inconvenient when they don’t match Tsai’s ideas.
Tsai trots out the old argument about “an eye for an eye” taken from the Old Testament, which he clearly does not understand. The phrase which he considers to be so inhumane is actually meant to protect people. It does not mean that if someone takes your eye, he must lose an eye, as Tsai erroneously believes. It means that an eye is the limit; you cannot take someone’s life for an eye. It was a very humane concept to prevent people from escalating punishment in revenge. He continues: “It goes without saying that life is precious.” Well, why does he say it then?
He focuses on the life of criminals, murderers who didn’t share Tsai’s enlightened viewpoint. They took life and thereby forfeited their sacred right to life. The people of Taiwan understand this very clearly and do not need the writer to civilize them.
Tsai then asks if executing murderers will “truly heal wounds?” This is a specious question. One could equally ask: Should families who have lost a loved one to a cold-blooded killer have to live with the knowledge that the guilty killer is alive while the innocent victim is dead? Tsai raises another misleading argument that execution is not a deterrent. Could that be because so few murderers are executed and that it takes so long that the public forgets? He prefers “solitary confinement for life” as a “humane” alternative. Tsai is incredibly naive to believe this.
If he knew anything about his humane solution, he would never have offered it. Several years ago, prisoners in Italy serving life sentences pleaded to be executed, as they considered their endless incarceration to be too inhumane. Do the hardworking taxpayers of Taiwan want to support killers for a lifetime in prison with all its attendant costs? I think not.
CHAIM MELAMED
Pingtung
Taiwan bound by law
Thank you for your editorial on the dangers of executing the innocent (“Opinions differ on death penalty,” March 15, page 8).
Hsu Wun-pin (許文彬) seems to think that as long as the death penalty system ensures no innocent people will be executed, nobody will object to the existence of the penalty itself. This is wrong.
Many people, including myself and members of the Alliance to End the Death Penalty, do object to the idea of the state using death as a means of punishment. The goal of perfecting the system to avoid all mistakes is a path many US states have taken, resulting in the costs of capital punishment cases far exceeding the cost of lifetime imprisonment. Yet, even with all these expensive legal safeguards, human beings, including judges, may err.
Second, in defense of former minister of justice Wang Ching-feng (王清峰), it should be noted that her position has been public knowledge since she was first appointed. The president and the premier certainly knew her opinion and implicitly supported her. However, there was an immediate threat to their political careers after Wang made her comments and so they turned their backs on her. She deserves to be congratulated for her courage and clear principles.
EDMUND RYDEN
Sinjhuang
There is much evidence that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is sending soldiers from the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to support Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — and is learning lessons for a future war against Taiwan. Until now, the CCP has claimed that they have not sent PLA personnel to support Russian aggression. On 18 April, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelinskiy announced that the CCP is supplying war supplies such as gunpowder, artillery, and weapons subcomponents to Russia. When Zelinskiy announced on 9 April that the Ukrainian Army had captured two Chinese nationals fighting with Russians on the front line with details
On a quiet lane in Taipei’s central Daan District (大安), an otherwise unremarkable high-rise is marked by a police guard and a tawdry A4 printout from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs indicating an “embassy area.” Keen observers would see the emblem of the Holy See, one of Taiwan’s 12 so-called “diplomatic allies.” Unlike Taipei’s other embassies and quasi-consulates, no national flag flies there, nor is there a plaque indicating what country’s embassy this is. Visitors hoping to sign a condolence book for the late Pope Francis would instead have to visit the Italian Trade Office, adjacent to Taipei 101. The death of
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), joined by the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), held a protest on Saturday on Ketagalan Boulevard in Taipei. They were essentially standing for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), which is anxious about the mass recall campaign against KMT legislators. President William Lai (賴清德) said that if the opposition parties truly wanted to fight dictatorship, they should do so in Tiananmen Square — and at the very least, refrain from groveling to Chinese officials during their visits to China, alluding to meetings between KMT members and Chinese authorities. Now that China has been defined as a foreign hostile force,
RSS