The Asian Human Rights Court Simulation (AHRCS) in October issued its judgement in the case of Chiou Ho-shun (邱和順) v. Republic of China (Taiwan).
The AHRCS was sponsored by former Justice of the Constitutional Court of Taiwan Hsu Yu-hsiu (許玉秀) and coorganized by National Chiao Tung University’s Institute of Technology Law, along with several non-governmental organizations in Taiwan.
The judgement held that domestic courts failed to fulfill their obligation and responsibility to ensure Chiou’s right to a fair trial and basic human rights. The judgement called on the Supreme Court of Taiwan for proper judicial remedy and prompt rectification.
Chiou has been a death-row inmate for nearly three decades. In 1988, he was charged with murdering a female insurance agent named Ko Ho Yu-lan (柯洪玉蘭) and a six-year-old boy named Lu Cheng (陸正). In 2011, his verdict became final after 11 trials.
In 2007, the Legal Aid Foundation and attorneys Lin Yong-song (林永頌) and Yu Po-hsiang (尤伯祥) read Chiou’s case file and believed him to be innocent.
Subsequently, a legal team, hosted by Yu and organized by the Judicial Reform Foundation, was bolstered by many more volunteer lawyers passionate about the case.
Last year, the team applied for the AHRCS hearing.
The legal team is now calling for President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) to grant Chiou amnesty.
The reason is simple: The AHRCS reflects the convergence of the nation’s old and contemporary judiciaries.
In the past, under the authoritarian regime of Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), the criminal justice system systemically violated human rights and due process, while at present, it is progressing toward true rule of law.
Yet, Chiou’s case is a vestige of the old regime. As Yu concluded in his closing argument at the AHRCS: Chiou’s 4.52m2 prison cell is like a time capsule, in which the lifetime of an innocent man and the failure of the authoritarian judiciary is frozen forever.
As Saint Augustine is purported to have said: “In the absence of justice, what is sovereignty but organized robbery?”
If President Tsai is proud of our shared values of democracy, freedom and respect for human rights, then she should grant amnesty.
We can demonstrate our strength, not weakness, in admitting our mistakes; we can show that the government not only wields a sword to punish, but also a mirror to reflect; we can prove that the government’s power can shield our citizens from the failures of the judiciary-of-old.
Regrettably, justice might at times be delayed, but justice should never be denied. Following the AHRCS, the time to act is now.
Huang Yu-zhe is an undergraduate in Soochow University’s Department of Political Science and a former executive secretary of Chiou Ho-shun’s Judicial Reform Foundation legal team.
They did it again. For the whole world to see: an image of a Taiwan flag crushed by an industrial press, and the horrifying warning that “it’s closer than you think.” All with the seal of authenticity that only a reputable international media outlet can give. The Economist turned what looks like a pastiche of a poster for a grim horror movie into a truth everyone can digest, accept, and use to support exactly the opinion China wants you to have: It is over and done, Taiwan is doomed. Four years after inaccurately naming Taiwan the most dangerous place on
Wherever one looks, the United States is ceding ground to China. From foreign aid to foreign trade, and from reorganizations to organizational guidance, the Trump administration has embarked on a stunning effort to hobble itself in grappling with what his own secretary of state calls “the most potent and dangerous near-peer adversary this nation has ever confronted.” The problems start at the Department of State. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has asserted that “it’s not normal for the world to simply have a unipolar power” and that the world has returned to multipolarity, with “multi-great powers in different parts of the
President William Lai (賴清德) recently attended an event in Taipei marking the end of World War II in Europe, emphasizing in his speech: “Using force to invade another country is an unjust act and will ultimately fail.” In just a few words, he captured the core values of the postwar international order and reminded us again: History is not just for reflection, but serves as a warning for the present. From a broad historical perspective, his statement carries weight. For centuries, international relations operated under the law of the jungle — where the strong dominated and the weak were constrained. That
On the eve of the 80th anniversary of Victory in Europe (VE) Day, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) made a statement that provoked unprecedented repudiations among the European diplomats in Taipei. Chu said during a KMT Central Standing Committee meeting that what President William Lai (賴清德) has been doing to the opposition is equivalent to what Adolf Hitler did in Nazi Germany, referencing ongoing investigations into the KMT’s alleged forgery of signatures used in recall petitions against Democratic Progressive Party legislators. In response, the German Institute Taipei posted a statement to express its “deep disappointment and concern”
RSS