As the world marked the Day Against the Death Penalty on Friday, the nation saw a move in the opposite direction — a renewed push calling for those convicted of violent crimes to be sent to death row, as supporters of the death penalty expressed dissatisfaction after the High Court’s Tainan branch Monday sentenced a man convicted of killing a 10-year-old boy to life in prison.
Some pro-death penalty groups have launched a campaign condemning the “unqualified” judges for failing to sentence the defendant Tseng Wen-chin (曾文欽) to death, which they said he deserved.
The Taichung District Court on Tuesday imposed a life sentence, rather than the death penalty, on a man found guilty of the murder of a girl who broke up with him, which further fueled outrage.
The debate over the death penalty aroused by Tseng’s case highlighted the issue groups opposing the death penalty worldwide focused on during Friday’s World Day Against the Death Penalty — mental health issues related to capital punishment. The High Court as well as the district court cited that Tseng suffered from psychiatric illnesses as an extenuating circumstance as they handed down the same sentence.
At the core of the argument that people with mental illness or intellectual disabilities should not face the death penalty is that their involvement in crimes is associated with a lack of access to treatment or lack of support in society, alongside other factors, including their capability to control themselves at the time of crime, vulnerability during investigation and trials, and more.
As the World Coalition Against the Death Penalty has said: “People with mental disabilities do not, in general, pose a higher risk of violence than the general population… They are at greater risk of becoming victims of violence than average… There are, however, numerous cases of people who were in need of mental healthcare, but they did not receive who then went on to commit acts of violence.”
In line with international human rights norms, the death penalty is wrong in all cases and under all circumstances. However, the argument that offenders should be exempted from capital punishment if they suffer mental issues is a perfect illustration of why state execution is illegitimate and immoral.
When a person is found guilty of a heinous crime, society as a whole has to do some soul-searching about the circumstances that contributed to the crime and recognize responsibility on its part. Eliminating criminals through execution is not conducive to mitigating the circumstances they have been subject to and preventing occurrences of similar crimes.
Not only the case of Tseng in December 2012, but the random killing spree on Taipei’s Mass Rapid Transit system in May and many other incidents that happened before and after these have prompted strong demands for death sentences for the defendants. In each case, there was little, if any, discussion as to whether the death penalty is an appropriate punishment for such attacks, or about the reasons behind the incidents and what kinds of assistance families of the victims and families of the offenders need.
The rationale often used to justify the use of the death penalty is that it is culturally embedded that retribution should be based on the principle of “a life for a life.”
However, that is nothing but a pretext. In nations that moved away from enforcing the death penalty decades ago, a movement to reinstate the sanction emerges whenever the countries face an increase in the crime rate or heinous crimes. It is not unique to Taiwan.
What is unique in Taiwan is the lack of political will. Without that, abolishing the death penalty will always be a long-term goal that cannot be achieved.
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under