Minister of the Interior Hsu Kuo-yung (徐國勇) has said that people who break their 14-day mandatory home confinement due to the COVID-19 outbreak should be treated like fugitives.
Taipei Mayor Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) has called for electronic tracking bracelets for people placed under home isolation or quarantine.
These suggestions might have merit; the question is whether they are legal.
Currently, anyone who breaches the conditions of a mandatory home isolation or quarantine order can be fined between NT$60,000 (US$1,969) and NT$300,000 or NT$10,000 and NT$150,000, depending on the nature of the offense.
The government has also unveiled a special bill addressing COVID-19 prevention that includes a maximum fine of NT$1 million for anyone who breaks quarantine.
However, it should be understood that isolation and quarantine orders are administrative rather than legal orders.
As such, it is debatable whether law enforcement agencies are obliged under the Code of Criminal Procedure (刑事訴訟法) to publish a wanted notice on their Web sites and in the media, as would be the norm in a standard fugitive case, to enlist the help of the public.
It is also debatable whether the code gives police and prosecutors the authority to arrest offenders if they are tracked down.
This leads to the question of whether behavior by a person who breaks the terms of an isolation or quarantine order should be criminalized by the government, and if so, should such a violation result in criminal prosecution, irrespective of whether the person infected others with the virus?
As for the use of electronic tracking devices, the legal grounds for their use was first introduced following an amendment to the Sexual Assault Crime Prevention Act (性侵害防治法) in 2005, which granted the authorities the power to track paroled sexual offenders.
Article 20, Paragraph 3, states: “The guardian who bears the responsibility of protection and supervision of the offender ... may report to the prosecutor or military prosecutor for permission to conduct electronic monitoring.”
Item four in the first clause of Article 116-2 of the code, which was amended in July last year, states that the court, if it grants suspension of detention, may order the defendant to “accept appropriate monitoring by technical equipment.”
This also applies when a prosecutor does not apply to a court for an arrest warrant or a judge decides not to detain a defendant to prevent the person from absconding.
In Taiwan, either a wrist or ankle bracelet fitted with a GPS transmitter is used to monitor convicted criminals 24 hours a day, in all weather conditions.
Therefore, if a sexual offender were to leave their home in contravention of the conditions of a home order, or if they removed the tracking device, law enforcement officers would be immediately alerted and could arrest the person.
Thanks to technological advancements, it is now possible to fit an alcohol concentration sensor or chemical detection chip to monitoring devices for repeat drunk driving offenders and drug users.
Such devices are already in use in the US and Canada, and they allow parole officers to determine whether convicted criminals are adhering to the conditions of their parole.
If the same concept of electronic monitoring were applied to people under mandatory home isolation or quarantine, in addition to a tracking bracelet, they could be compelled to wear a smart watch to continuously monitor their body temperature, as well as their whererabouts and physical condition, around the clock.
Aside from informing authorities when people break their isolation or quarantine order, tracking bracelets allow authorities to ascertain what places people have visited, which could facilitate the implementation of emergency prevention and control measures if needed.
The problem is that a person under isolation or quarantine is not a criminal offender and the Communicable Disease Control Act (傳染病防治法) provides no legal authority for tracking devices. The authorities cannot exceed the limits of the law.
As to whether the law should be amended to allow for high-level surveillance of suspected carriers of infectious diseases, the debate is likely to be bogged down in an argument over the difficult issue of how to balance effective epidemic prevention and a person’s human rights.
Wu Ching-chin is an associate professor of law at Aletheia University
Translated by Edward Jones
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
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
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.