I was very shocked by C.A. Carelli's letter (Letters, Feb. 15, page 8). Carelli deserves our admiration for his courage and frankness. He is courageous in that, apparently, he does not care that others may consider him a bigot. His frankness gives others the chance to explain why they disagree with him.
I do not understand why Carelli thinks that rape should be considered any differently from other types of physical assault. Would he argue that a robber who chopped off his victim's arm should not be subjected to mandatory prosecution? Perhaps Carelli would argue that prosecution should not take place, as long as the victim "consents" to having his arm chopped off?
The purpose of the criminal law is to punish offenses so serious that they are deemed to have inflicted injuries not just on the immediate victims, but also on society at large. As injuries are also inflicted on society, the offense is subject to mandatory prosecution and not left up to the individual victims to decide whether or not to prosecute the offenders. As for the private injuries suffered by the individual victims, they have discretion about seeking compensation through civil litigation. So, although criminal prosecutions of rape victims have become mandatory in Taiwan, the victims may still decide for themselves whether they want to seek civil compensation. This kind of system can hardly be characterized as paternalistic.
I have a feeling that Carelli does not realize the enormous pressure faced by rape victims in Taiwanese culture to settle against their will. They know that once the crime is publicized, the public tend to search for reasons to blame the victims, including those suggested by Carelli himself -- "getting [herself] into a hazardous situation and being confused as to whether she was raped or merely acted foolishly." Getting herself into a "hazardous situation" may be foolish, but no amount of "foolishness" justifies rape. As for being "confused," just go ask any female whether she thinks she is likely to feel "confused" about such a thing.
The above-described skepticism toward rape victims is nothing compared to the other types of name-smearing that they suffer. As the Taipei Times editorial ("Thinking on rape needs changing, Feb. 11, page 8), points out, rape victims often face speculation about participating in set ups or about their own promiscuity.
If the prosecution of rape were not mandatory, the crime would go unpunished in most instances, because the victims prefer to settle than suffer additional insults. When a crime goes unpunished, it tends to take place with increased frequency.
Most other countries have made prosecution for rape mandatory. Does Carelli think that these countries are being unreasonable? If so, he must be very confident, for he seems to think he is smarter than all the combined brains of the legal experts across the globe.
Cyndi Lai
Peitou
Rape is a heinous crime
Your recent editorial "Thinking on rape needs to change" is completely correct. Just like murder, rape is a heinous crime that offends against not only the immediate victim but society as a whole. Some idiots have argued, "Why drag the victim to court if they don't want to sue?" The whole of society feels the pain of crimes like murder, rape and kidnappings. This is why the Taipei Times is totally correct to advocate a change in Taiwan's penal code to make rape prosecutions mandatory.
Taiwan has a male chauvinistic system that allows the "paying off " of victims in exchange for their silence. Our system allows the rich and privileged to buy their way out of crimes. Mandatory prosecution is the only fair and even handed way to apply the law. Thank you for your enlightened view.
Shirley Lin
Taipei
More banking reform needed
It is encouraging to see the Ministry of Finance doing its utmost to consolidate the over crowded banking industry ("Merger plans for banks revived," Feb. 12, page 17). But, as an investment banker, I believe the ministry should first, in collaboration with the Securities and Exchange Commission, look into financial shareholdings of political parties in financial institutions.
Political parties should be restricted from holding such shares so as to prevent them from controlling such financial institutions.
Taiwan's financial institutions, including banks and securities companies, are selectively owned and managed by political parties who are appointed to the boards of directors because of their percentage shareholdings. Reports have shown that those institutions which have parties as their major shareholders tend to slacken in their credit risk management, to the advantage of these "major shareholders," but at the expense of depositors.
It would be wise if political parties were restricted from holding shares in any of these institutions,) otherwise the problems of the past will continue and perhaps the whole financial sector will ultimately be monopolized by these parties.
We should address the financial regulations pertaining to parties' interests in financial institutions before we begin to talk about bank mergers.
Michael Teo
Singapore
US President Donald Trump last week told reporters that he had signed about 12 letters to US trading partners, which were set to be sent out yesterday, levying unilateral tariff rates of up to 70 percent from Aug. 1. However, Trump did not say which countries the letters would be sent to, nor did he discuss the specific tariff rates, reports said. The news of the tariff letters came as Washington and Hanoi reached a trade deal earlier last week to cut tariffs on Vietnamese exports to the US to 20 percent from 46 percent, making it the first Asian country
In a meeting with Haitian Minister of Foreign Affairs Jean-Victor Harvel Jean-Baptiste on Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) vowed to continue providing aid to Haiti. Taiwan supports Haiti with development in areas such as agriculture, healthcare and education through initiatives run by the Taiwan International Cooperation and Development Fund (ICDF). The nation it has established itself as a responsible, peaceful and innovative actor committed to global cooperation, Jean-Baptiste said. Testimonies such as this give Taiwan a voice in the global community, where it often goes unheard. Taiwan’s reception in Haiti also contrasts with how China has been perceived in countries in the region
On Monday, Minister of Foreign Affairs Lin Chia-lung (林佳龍) delivered a welcome speech at the ILA-ASIL Asia-Pacific Research Forum, addressing more than 50 international law experts from more than 20 countries. With an aim to refute the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) claim to be the successor to the 1945 Chinese government and its assertion that China acquired sovereignty over Taiwan, Lin articulated three key legal positions in his speech: First, the Cairo Declaration and Potsdam Declaration were not legally binding instruments and thus had no legal effect for territorial disposition. All determinations must be based on the San Francisco Peace
As things heated up in the Middle East in early June, some in the Pentagon resisted American involvement in the Israel-Iran war because it would divert American attention and resources from the real challenge: China. This was exactly wrong. Rather, bombing Iran was the best thing that could have happened for America’s Asia policy. When it came to dealing with the Iranian nuclear program, “all options are on the table” had become an American mantra over the past two decades. But the more often US administration officials insisted that military force was in the cards, the less anyone believed it. After
RSS