You would think that Taiwan had become the murder capital of the world overnight if you were to believe the press in this country.
Driven by President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), Premier Wu Den-yih (吳敦義), Prosecutor-General Huang Shih-ming (黃世銘) and Minister of Justice Tseng Yung-fu (曾勇夫), and encouraged by the Judicial Yuan, the campaign for the abolition of capital punishment has been condemned without trial, case summarily dismissed and the death sentence imposed. This is an utterly unacceptable state of affairs.
The current environment fostered by our government, press-generated hysteria and a sense of moral panic amongst the public as a whole is quite regrettable. As a result, Taiwan has become mired in a conservative mindset preoccupied with traditional Confucian values, prey to callousness and indifference to suffering. Taiwan risks turning into a nation of irrational, clamoring, barbaric people with no regard for human rights.
Over the last couple of months death penatly abolition advocates have been subjected to slander after slander which, at times, has amounted to little more than irrational demonization.
Most of this has come from uninformed, anti-intellectual quarters quite ignorant of the direction the rest of the civilized world is moving in. Do they believe EU countries such as the UK, Germany, Sweden and Denmark, along with all the other countries in the world that have abolished the death penalty, are simply pretending to care about human rights? Is there any veracity at all to their claims that these countires would rather protect criminals than deal with the feelings of victims families?
Must we really join the ranks of the other 18 countries — including China, North Korea, Iran, Iraq and Yemen — that vigorously practice capital punishment?
It is wrong for the state to take the lives of people, just as it is wrong for individuals to do so. To make such an assertion in no way implies that murderers are innocent or that victims families should not be helped.
Ma, Tseng and Huang have consistently said that they see the abolition of the death penalty as a goal and have even voiced their support for such a move. But can they be taken at their word?
They appear all too willing to use capital punishment for political gain and that makes me doubt whether their support is genuine or conditional on public opinion polls. Up until this point, I have heard only arguments for why the death penalty should be retained and precious little about why they personally think it should be abolished.
Tseng has even asserted that it took European countries hundreds of years to do away with the death penalty, failing to make clear precisely from which date we plan to start counting. Is he suggesting that we should wait a century or two before we do so?
It is sometimes hard to beleive that it has been more than 20 years since the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) ended martial law and introduced democracy in Taiwan. Both Ma and Tseng have said they favor abolition — do you believe them? Because I don’t, not one bit. They talk, but do nothing about it.
The government maintains that it is executing criminals in accordance with the law of the land, refusing to aknowledge that they are actually following two laws, now defunct, that were promulgated during the martial law period. It’s almost as if democracy never happened.
Chiu Hei-yuan is a research fellow at Academia Sinica’s Institute of Sociology.
TRANSLATED BY PAUL COOPER
In the event of a war with China, Taiwan has some surprisingly tough defenses that could make it as difficult to tackle as a porcupine: A shoreline dotted with swamps, rocks and concrete barriers; conscription for all adult men; highways and airports that are built to double as hardened combat facilities. This porcupine has a soft underbelly, though, and the war in Iran is exposing it: energy. About 39,000 ships dock at Taiwan’s ports each year, more than the 30,000 that transit the Strait of Hormuz. About one-fifth of their inbound tonnage is coal, oil, refined fuels and liquefied natural gas (LNG),
To counter the CCP’s escalating threats, Taiwan must build a national consensus and demonstrate the capability and the will to fight. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) often leans on a seductive mantra to soften its threats, such as “Chinese do not kill Chinese.” The slogan is designed to frame territorial conquest (annexation) as a domestic family matter. A look at the historical ledger reveals a different truth. For the CCP, being labeled “family” has never been a guarantee of safety; it has been the primary prerequisite for state-sanctioned slaughter. From the forced starvation of 150,000 civilians at the Siege of Changchun
The two major opposition parties, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), jointly announced on Tuesday last week that former TPP lawmaker Chang Chi-kai (張啟楷) would be their joint candidate for Chiayi mayor, following polling conducted earlier this month. It is the first case of blue-white (KMT-TPP) cooperation in selecting a joint candidate under an agreement signed by their chairpersons last month. KMT and TPP supporters have blamed their 2024 presidential election loss on failing to decide on a joint candidate, which ended in a dramatic breakdown with participants pointing fingers, calling polls unfair, sobbing and walking
In recent weeks, Taiwan has witnessed a surge of public anxiety over the possible introduction of Indian migrant workers. What began as a policy signal from the Ministry of Labor quickly escalated into a broader controversy. Petitions gathered thousands of signatures within days, political figures issued strong warnings, and social media became saturated with concerns about public safety and social stability. At first glance, this appears to be a straightforward policy question: Should Taiwan introduce Indian migrant workers or not? However, this framing is misleading. The current debate is not fundamentally about India. It is about Taiwan’s labor system, its
RSS