The Executive Yuan needs to be applauded for approving a draft amendment to the Road Traffic Management and Penalty Act (道路交通管理處罰條例) that would require people who are caught driving under the influence of alcohol to pay for the compulsory safety lectures they are required to attend, instead of the government covering the costs.
The act should have been amended long ago, as it places a burden on taxpayers for other people’s wrongdoings.
The bill is one of many indicators that the government is serious about curbing drunk driving and giving teeth to traffic regulations, which have too often led to ridiculously light sentences for drunk drivers, even for those who caused fatal accidents.
The government in June raised the penalty for drivers who try to flee from a police checkpoint to a NT$20,000 and a six-month suspension of their driver’s license. The measure took effect last month.
However, the penalty for refusing to submit to a breath alcohol test is NT$90,000, which is why people demanded a bigger fine for motorists who try to escape from checkpoints in the first place. Facing a choice between paying a NT$20,000 or a NT$90,000 fine, some drunk drivers could be tempted to flee. Even if they are eventually caught, their actions could pose a serious public risk as they speed down the streets in an attempt to flee the police — more so than refusing to take a breath alcohol test.
From January to March, 15.2 percent of motorists who were stopped at police checkpoints in New Taipei City refused to take a breath test, preferring to pay the NT$90,000 fine instead of facing drunk-driving charges. The ratio in Taipei was 11.4 percent.
Vague remarks by government officials have already cast doubt on whether the amended act would be enough to discourage drunk driving.
Department of Railways and Highways Director-General Chen Wen-juei (陳文瑞) told reporters last week that the amendment would hopefully deter drunk driving, while Deputy Minister of Transportation and Communications Wang Kwo-tsai (王國材) declined to disclose exactly how much the offenders would pay for the lectures, saying: “What matters more is the spirit of the bill, which is to ensure fairness by having people who disobey the law pay for their offenses instead of taxpayers.”
Such “government-speak” leads to the suspicion that the figure would not be enough to deter drunk driving, as significant fines have yet to alleviate the problem.
Amending the law would indeed ensure fairness to taxpayers, but its other effects are in doubt.
What really would make a difference is clamping down. Taipei prosecutors on Friday last week charged a driver — who allegedly killed another motorist and seriously injured two others while driving under the influence — with manslaughter instead of the usual “offenses against public safety and negligence in causing death.”
Their rationale was that “even though [the offender] knew he had drunk much more than the legal limit, [he] still drove home, directly causing the fatal accident, so he should be charged for unintentionally killing [the victim] through his actions.”
Some people might deem the charges unfair, considering that the driver who mowed down three migrant workers, killing two of them, did not face manslaughter charges during his trial in August.
However, a precedent has to be set at some point.
This is not the first time a drunk driver who caused fatalities has been charged with manslaughter — a man was last year convicted of the charge and sentenced to 13 years in jail — but the real key is for prosecutors and judges to be consistent with their interpretations and stop letting people off the hook for destroying lives.
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry