Foreigners praise Taiwan's planned human rights law

The draft human rights law demonstrates the government's commitment to promoting human rights, but it should more closely resemble existing international covenants, an international group said yesterday.

Four of the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), which is based in Geneva and dedicated to the implementation of international law and principles that advance human rights, came to Taiwan this week to give their opinions on the draft.

"The draft human rights law has the potential to fill an important gap in human rights protection in Taiwan. Furthermore, it is an important expression of Taiwan's commitment to the rule of law and to international law," the commission said in its initial review, which was released at a public symposium yesterday.

The commission especially commended the articles in the draft "which go beyond the requirement of the CCPR [International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights] and the CESCR [International Covenant on Economic Social and Cultural Rights]," including those on protecting and promoting the rights of indigenous peoples, same-sex marriages, the right to asylum, nationality and property, and the right of access to the media.

But the commission also strongly recommended that the draft should follow international human rights standards more closely by adopting the language of the two international conventions rather than developing its own terminologies.

Gerald Staberock, coordinator of the ICJ's national implementation program, said this would ensure that when local courts interpret the new law there would be international precedents to follow.

"So this way the local courts would not just develop their own interpretations, which may be far from the international practices," Staberock said.

The ICJ also strongly recommended that the law be given constitutional or quasi-constitutional status.

The ICJ pointed out that the current draft did not contain any limitation clause, which was "one of the most serious shortcomings" of the legislation. Staberock said that most freedoms needed to limited to prevent one's freedom from violating another's, and to ensure public interests when necessary.

He said that limits on freedoms could only go to so far, and having limitation clauses to explain clearly the limits could prevent people's freedoms from being "unduly limited."

The ICJ also said that the law should include the "complete and unconditional abolishment" of the death penalty rather than a gradual abolishment.

The Cabinet is still reviewing two versions of the draft law presented by the Presidential Office and the Ministry of Justice.

The most important and controversial articles in the law include the gradual abolishment of the death penalty and the rights of homosexuals to adopt children.