Over the past few weeks, there have been numerous reports of violent incidents, including brawls, at adult-oriented entertainment venues, which in Taiwan are collectively known as “special businesses.” Police departments have responded to the spate of violent incidents by conducting frequent raids on special businesses to deter such incidents.
Of course, there is nothing new about this strategy of intensified raids; it has long been the measure most often employed by Taiwanese police to deal with criminal incidents at special businesses.
However, although this strategy might have an immediate effect of suppressing crime and restoring social order, it is generally only effective in the short term and some commentators have raised doubts over its long-term effectiveness.
Violence and brawls at special businesses need to be handled in a different way from conventional incidents of street violence, because they are characterized by a high degree of spontaneity, emotionality and often break out between people who do not know each other, or do not know each other well. In terms of current criminological theory, violent incidents of this sort are generally a result of poor emotional processing. In such cases, the two conflicting parties might not harbor deep hatred for one another or be involved in disputes over things like heavy debts. The theory is that they occur when the two sides misinterpret the situation and respond badly.
In 1977, US criminologist David Luckenbill published a paper titled Criminal Homicide as a Situated Transaction, in which he analyzed violent crimes from the point of view of emotional processing. Based on his research, Luckenbill took the view that violent crimes result from emotional interactions between the two conflicting parties, as well as third parties, such as onlookers. He found that the modes of behavior of the two conflicting parties are stimulated and influenced by each other’s actions, and are focused on saving face, maintaining their reputations and demonstrating their strength of character. Under such circumstances, they find that resorting to violence is the most effective way to resolve issues of face and character.
In the late 1960s, Canadian-American sociologist Erving Goffman proposed the concept of a “character contest.” The idea is that when the two sides come into conflict, they both want to maintain face and their reputation, and cannot allow themselves to appear relatively weak in character, so the use of violence becomes a natural choice.
This is especially true at special businesses, whose mostly young customers are surrounded by their peers and members of the opposite sex. In such an environment, there is likely to be a greater potential for conflict.
While criminology suggests that “club violence” should be handled by emotional control, the police establishment’s strategy of frequent raids only has the short-term effect of situational control. Of course, the police cannot control things by standing guard at the doors of special businesses all day every day, so the business operators must bear responsibility for controlling situations. In other words, when operators become aware of signs of illegal activity or conflict, such as when customers are carrying narcotics or suspicious people enter the premises, or when a conflict situation gradually escalates and is going to get out of control, they have a duty to report it to the police.
Running a special business is not wrong in itself, but operators are in the wrong if they do nothing to stop violent incidents from happening on their premises. They are high-consumption, high-profit leisure businesses whose owners often, intentionally or otherwise, overlook their role as situational controllers.
This is why some countries have developed so-called “third-party policing” strategies, which involve compelling operators to play the role of obligatory situational controllers. This strategy has produced quite good results, especially in relation to narcotics crime, violent crime and problems involving teenagers. Given its success overseas, Taiwan’s national and local governments would do well to study third-party policing and put it into practice.
The thinking behind third-party policing is that, in dealing with criminal incidents such as nightclub brawls and motel drug parties, police forces cannot be completely effective solely by exercising their own public power. They therefore need to coordinate with other departments that have public power to make operators take on the role of situational controllers.
For example, Article 31-1, Paragraph 3, Subparagraph 4 of the Narcotics Hazard Prevention Act (毒品危害防制條例) stipulates that if the operators of “specific places of business” discover people suspected of using or possessing narcotics, they must report it to the police.
Paragraph 3 of the same article stipulates: “Where personnel of a specific place of business is aware of persons using or in possession of narcotics, but fail to report to the police, the municipality, county (city) government shall impose a fine above NT$100,000 [US$3,246], but less than NT$1 million on the responsible person of the place... In the event where the violation is considered serious, the government authority in charge of the relevant enterprise may order the place to suspend its business for a period above six months, but less than one year and six months, or may order the place to close down.”
Paragraph 4 of the same article stipulates: “The municipality and county (city) government shall periodically publish the list of the specific places of business discovered to have serious violations as described in the preceding paragraph for the most recent year.”
The “municipality and county (city) government” and “the government authority in charge of the relevant enterprise” can take various administrative actions, including fines, suspension of business, closing businesses down and periodically publishing a list of “specific places of business discovered to have serious violations.” By compelling business operators to assist in crime prevention, these administrative actions are an embryonic form of third-party policing.
Considering the serious impact that motel drug parties and nightclub brawls can have on social order, the authorities should consider adopting third-party policing as a potentially effective response strategy.
Lin Tsang-song is an adjunct assistant professor at Central Police University.
Translated by Julian Clegg
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS