On April 1, Minister of Justice Tsai Ching-hsiang (蔡清祥) out of the blue signed an order to carry out the execution of 53-year-old death row inmate Weng Jen-hsien (翁仁賢) — while the nation as a whole was grappling with the COVID-19 pandemic.
As a coordinated effort was tirelessly being made to save lives, the Taiwanese government, which Foreign Policy described in a headline as a “coronavirus success story,” was accused of ending a person’s life arbitrarily.
The EU soon expressed its strong condemnation to demand that Taiwan refrain from any future executions, and reinstate and maintain a de facto moratorium.
The Taipei Bar Association also censured the government for breaching due process in the case, given that Weng was entitled to protections under the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, as well as the possibility of a presidential pardon, yet the minister admitted not consulting with President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) first.
The death penalty in Taiwan has been seen as an effective tool for the government to redirect the focus onto the social dissatisfaction and outrage toward a death row inmate.
National Development Council statistics showed that 82 percent of Taiwanese believe that the death penalty would effectively deter crimes and protect social security, although countless academic studies and innocent cases have proved otherwise.
Almost 90 percent of respondents to one survey opposed abolition of the death penalty.
Therefore, through the death penalty, an unpopular president can appear to have shown a tough stance on crime and realized social justice, thereby enjoying an immediate boost in support in polls.
However, what is puzzling is that there was no need to do so, as Tsai owned the overwhelming support of the public, a record-breaking rating of almost 80 percent.
It is not a matter of whether the minister jumped the gun and failed to strictly comply with the demands of two international covenants, but ultimately rather a bigger concern that Taiwan’s road to end the death penalty is unseen.
There has been an endless cycle over the past decade: When a death row prisoner is executed, there is a week-long national conversation about the use of the death penalty — differing opinions and divisive positions between proponents and opponents — and finally any efforts made to educate the public about respect for human rights all return to square one.
The president should remember: If pushing for “a nation built on the basis of human rights” is the right path for Taiwan, she has a responsibility and moral obligation to break the cycle.
History has shown that a respected leader should take the lead by going in the right direction, instead of heeding public opinion and becoming a follower.
Huang Yu-zhe is a political science undergraduate at Soochow University and has been accepted to National Chengchi University’s Graduate Institute of Law and Interdisciplinary Studies.
For Taiwan, the ongoing US and Israeli strikes on Iranian targets are a warning signal: When a major power stretches the boundaries of self-defense, smaller states feel the tremors first. Taiwan’s security rests on two pillars: US deterrence and the credibility of international law. The first deters coercion from China. The second legitimizes Taiwan’s place in the international community. One is material. The other is moral. Both are indispensable. Under the UN Charter, force is lawful only in response to an armed attack or with UN Security Council authorization. Even pre-emptive self-defense — long debated — requires a demonstrably imminent
Every analyst watching Iran’s succession crisis is asking who would replace supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Yet, the real question is whether China has learned enough from the Persian Gulf to survive a war over Taiwan. Beijing purchases roughly 90 percent of Iran’s exported crude — some 1.61 million barrels per day last year — and holds a US$400 billion, 25-year cooperation agreement binding it to Tehran’s stability. However, this is not simply the story of a patron protecting an investment. China has spent years engineering a sanctions-evasion architecture that was never really about Iran — it was about Taiwan. The
Since being re-elected, US President Donald Trump has consistently taken concrete action to counter China and to safeguard the interests of the US and other democratic nations. The attacks on Iran, the earlier capture of deposed of Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro and efforts to remove Chinese influence from the Panama Canal all demonstrate that, as tensions with Beijing intensify, Washington has adopted a hardline stance aimed at weakening its power. Iran and Venezuela are important allies and major oil suppliers of China, and the US has effectively decapitated both. The US has continuously strengthened its military presence in the Philippines. Japanese Prime
After “Operation Absolute Resolve” to capture former Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro, the US joined Israel on Saturday last week in launching “Operation Epic Fury” to remove Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and his theocratic regime leadership team. The two blitzes are widely believed to be a prelude to US President Donald Trump changing the geopolitical landscape in the Indo-Pacific region, targeting China’s rise. In the National Security Strategic report released in December last year, the Trump administration made it clear that the US would focus on “restoring American pre-eminence in the Western hemisphere,” and “competing with China economically and militarily
RSS