Taiwan is no stranger to violent criminals being let off with lenient sentences, with another ridiculous ruling taking place last week.
Hsu Wen-ping (許文炳), who was convicted of brutally murdering a friend and mutilating his body, had a life sentence reduced to 18 years, because he is an alcoholic who was intoxicated when the incident occurred.
The judges said Hsu qualified for a reduced term under Article 19 of the Criminal Code, which governs crimes committed by people with mental disorders and stipulates that “punishment may be reduced ... as a result of an obvious reduction in judgement.”
This is ludicrous. According to the judges’ reasoning, any crimes committed while intoxicated can be excused. Will every alcoholic who commits a crime from now on receive a reduced sentence? Should everyone start downing bottles of whiskey before going out and killing friends? This type of ruling handed down by so-called “dinosaur judges” is so mind-blowing that it would be easy to think that Taiwanese society cares more about criminals than the victims.
A quick search on the Internet will turn up countless similar cases, many of them taking place this year.
In April, a man who raped a mentally disabled girl avoided jail time, because the court “took mercy on him” as he was willing to reach a settlement with the family, admitted his crime, appeared to be remorseful and had no prior convictions.
In June, a man who raped his stepson received only a four-year jail term, because he paid the child to not cry during the act and allegedly did not use force. Simply unbelievable.
There is a limit to compassion. Taiwan does not have a public sex offender registry because of opposition from “human rights groups” when the law was being drafted a decade ago. There are so many oppressed and suffering people in Taiwan who need help, and this is evidence that some would prefer to fight for the rights of criminals.
Obviously, the public is fed up with this situation, as evidenced by an online petition urging the government to punish drunk drivers, sex offenders and child abusers by caning that surpassed the 5,000-signature threshold that warrants an official response.
Without endorsing this type of eye-for-eye punishment, the petition is a clear indicator that the nation’s judicial system is broken and that people are resorting to desperate proposals. There is obviously something wrong, as evidenced by a five-time drunk driving offender who two weeks ago received an eight-month jail sentence, which was considered serious. In the four previous convictions, he was never “punished” for his misdeeds, as each time his sentence was commuted to a fine or community service. The eight-month sentence is pretty much a slap on the wrist for the five-time offender and is unlikely to cause a change in his behavior.
Does Taiwan really need to resort to caning people? With rulings such as these, it might have no other choice. Most disappointing perhaps is the government’s response to the petition, with Premier William Lai (賴清德) saying that Taiwan is a democratic and law-abiding nation where human rights are valued. Yes, Taiwan is a nation that values human rights so much that it protects the identity of sex offenders, condones drunk driving, lets rapists go free and reduces the sentence for drunken murderers.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath