In December 2001, this newspaper ran an editorial with a headline similar to this one. Taiwan, along with the rest of the world, has changed immeasurably since then, but adultery remains a criminal offense in Taiwan under Article 239 of the Criminal Code.
This nation is one of the few in the world to still consider adultery a criminal, rather than civil, offense, with punishment of up to one year in prison, but hopefully this could finally change in the foreseeable future.
The Council of Grand Justices on Tuesday is to begin hearing arguments on the constitutionality of that article, following petitions from 14 judges and a defendant in an adultery case.
While previous reforms have failed, a ruling by the grand justices could once again be the impetus for the Legislative Yuan to change the law, much as the justices were with Constitutional Interpretation No. 748 on May 24, 2017, which ruled that prohibitions against same-sex marriage were unconstitutional.
As with that ruling, the grand justices will be reviewing Article 239 in light of the legislature’s 2009 ratification of the UN International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the UN International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the government’s implementation of those laws.
The Ministry of Justice tried to overhaul the law in the mid-1990s, supported by the Awakening Foundation and other civic groups. There have been other campaigns since then, but defenders of the “status quo” have argued that changing the law would only encourage extramarital affairs, leading to the breakdown of more marriages and families, and that the law gives wives leverage against errant husbands in divorce cases.
The only real change to the idea that adultery should be punished under criminal law since the early years of the Republic of China was that in 1934, the Legislative Yuan amended the law so that both men and women could be held criminally liable; prior to that, only women were. And yet, it is women who have continued to suffer disproportionately under the law: They have been prosecuted at a higher rate than men, and therefore have higher rates of conviction.
This is because under the law the “innocent spouse” must file charges against both the errant spouse and the spouse’s partner in adultery. Data from district prosecutors’ offices show that while more than half of accusations against a husband end up being dropped, the withdrawal rate for accusations against a wife is a little more than 40 percent, and a little more than 30 percent for accusations against female third parties.
Women have been more willing to withdraw charges against their husbands — be it for the sake of their family or for financial reasons — than men are against their wives, and while women might be willing to forgive their husbands, they are more likely to continue to push for charges against their husbands’ mistresses or lovers.
Yet to win such convictions, there must be evidence of adultery, which has led to salacious media reports over the years of police and private detectives breaking into hotel rooms to catch allegedly errant spouses in flagrante delicto, and gather evidence, such as video footage, photographs or used condoms.
Police have better things to do than try to catch errant spouses, and criminal prosecutions are no solution to marital woes.
A change to the law is long overdue: Not just because Article 239 is a violation of human rights, but because criminalization of adultery — much like the imposition of the death penalty in murder cases — has failed to deter illegal behavior.
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
Former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) trip to China provides a pertinent reminder of why Taiwanese protested so vociferously against attempts to force through the cross-strait service trade agreement in 2014 and why, since Ma’s presidential election win in 2012, they have not voted in another Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) candidate. While the nation narrowly avoided tragedy — the treaty would have put Taiwan on the path toward the demobilization of its democracy, which Courtney Donovan Smith wrote about in the Taipei Times in “With the Sunflower movement Taiwan dodged a bullet” — Ma’s political swansong in China, which included fawning dithyrambs