Since the late 1990s there has been a steady decline in the number of executions carried out in Taiwan. There were 384 from 1989 to 1999, which fell to 73 in the following decade. In 2006, Taiwan abolished the mandatory death penalty and in 2009 took the progressive step of adopting the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), as a matter of domestic law.
In voluntarily agreeing to conform to the standards and objectives of the ICCPR — Article 6 of which concludes that “nothing in this article shall be invoked to delay or to prevent the abolition of capital punishment by any State Party to the present Covenant” — Taiwan has committed to being on an “irrevocable path towards total abolition of the death penalty in the foreseeable future.”
However, progress toward abolition has stalled, as 35 people have been executed since 2009. The last was Weng Jen-hsien (翁仁賢), who was executed for murder in April 2020.
The Death Penalty Project has worked in Taiwan for more than a decade, and has been privileged to meet with members of President Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) Democratic Progressive Party administration who have reaffirmed a commitment to the eventual abolition of capital punishment, but have cited apparent public support as their primary reason for hesitancy.
In 2019, the project, in partnership with the Taiwan Alliance Against the Death Penalty, published two research articles on Taiwan’s use of capital punishment.
The first, a report on wrongful convictions, evidenced alarming failings in the criminal justice system and highlighted a real risk that innocent people could be killed by the state.
The second examined the public’s attitudes toward capital punishment and revealed that 71 percent of Taiwanese, despite initially being in favor of retaining capital punishment, would not oppose its abolition if it was replaced with life imprisonment without parole.
The research also demonstrated that people’s initial support fell dramatically when information was provided on wrongful convictions or errors in the administration of the punishment and when realistic case scenarios were considered.
The research indicated that public support for the death penalty is not deeply entrenched, exists in the abstract and is not sustained when contextualized.
The findings of those studies are highly significant in evidencing grave risks in the system, and in demonstrating the nuances and flexibility of public opinion, which was regarded as the central obstacle to abolition.
To explore other factors that could be impeding Taiwan’s progress toward abolition, the project and its Taiwanese partner in 2020 commissioned the University of Oxford and Soochow University to conduct a study examining the views of Taiwan’s legislators.
Navigating the many challenges posed by COVID-19, independent researchers contacted all of Taiwan’s 113 legislators, one-third of whom took part.
Face-to-face interviews were conducted using a research tool designed to reveal complexities in attitudes to capital punishment and the criminal justice system, as well as provide a context for those responses.
The study revealed a remarkable finding — 61 percent of those interviewed were in support of abolishing the death penalty, and of the 39 percent who were against it, only one lawmaker felt strongly that Taiwan should keep capital punishment.
The research sought to provide further context, revealing legislators to be well informed on the issue, with those in favor of abolition more informed than those against it.
Many were aware of the intrinsic risk of wrongful convictions and of the serious concerns raised in the 2019 report. The rationales of the majority of those in favor of abolition were concerns over human rights issues and the risk of executing the innocent.
The research revealed that most legislators appeared to have low levels of trust in the criminal justice system and doubted its ability to offer adequate safeguards to those facing execution.
Disturbingly, most of the legislators believed wrongful convictions “sometimes” occur, and only 11 percent were satisfied that they rarely occur in Taiwan.
Social justice measures such as poverty reduction, mental health interventions and improved moral education of young people were preferred over capital punishment by all legislators when they were asked to rank the most effective policies to reduce serious crime — only one legislator chose “more executions.”
However, despite their own reservations, the persisting presumption of strong public support for capital punishment continued to influence their views.
Researchers then presented legislators with the findings from the public opinion study published in 2019 and asked them again for their position.
Having considered the evidence showing an openness to abolition among the public, as well as the public’s own distrust in the criminal justice system, support for abolition jumped from 61 to 81 percent, an overwhelming majority. Support for retention dropped to 19 percent, with no one remaining strongly in favor.
These are groundbreaking findings that show that not only do legislators support abolition, but also how that support can be bolstered by the introduction of research revealing the limits of claims of public support for the death penalty, which are significantly overstated.
Political will and principled leadership are crucial to bringing about an end to the death penalty, and as an influential group with the power to enact lasting change, legislators could play an important role.
Having voiced their support for abolition and acknowledging the real risk of wrongful convictions and systemic concerns about the administration of justice, now is the time for legislators to act and share these concerns with the public.
It is hoped that the latest study reassures Taiwan’s leaders that there is a will to bring about change.
Taiwan has recognized the benefits of adhering to international human rights standards that distinguishes it as an emerging model for democracy and human rights in the Indo-Pacific region.
Abolition of the death penalty would further strengthen Taiwan’s position and cement its international reputation and standing with other like-minded democracies.
Saul Lehrfreund is coexecutive director of the Death Penalty Project. Carolyn Hoyle is a professor of criminology at the University of Oxford and director of the Death Penalty Research Unit.
On Sunday, 13 new urgent care centers (UCC) officially began operations across the six special municipalities. The purpose of the centers — which are open from 8am to midnight on Sundays and national holidays — is to reduce congestion in hospital emergency rooms, especially during the nine-day Lunar New Year holiday next year. It remains to be seen how effective these centers would be. For one, it is difficult for people to judge for themselves whether their condition warrants visiting a major hospital or a UCC — long-term public education and health promotions are necessary. Second, many emergency departments acknowledge
US President Donald Trump’s seemingly throwaway “Taiwan is Taiwan” statement has been appearing in headlines all over the media. Although it appears to have been made in passing, the comment nevertheless reveals something about Trump’s views and his understanding of Taiwan’s situation. In line with the Taiwan Relations Act, the US and Taiwan enjoy unofficial, but close economic, cultural and national defense ties. They lack official diplomatic relations, but maintain a partnership based on shared democratic values and strategic alignment. Excluding China, Taiwan maintains a level of diplomatic relations, official or otherwise, with many nations worldwide. It can be said that
Victory in conflict requires mastery of two “balances”: First, the balance of power, and second, the balance of error, or making sure that you do not make the most mistakes, thus helping your enemy’s victory. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has made a decisive and potentially fatal error by making an enemy of the Jewish Nation, centered today in the State of Israel but historically one of the great civilizations extending back at least 3,000 years. Mind you, no Israeli leader has ever publicly declared that “China is our enemy,” but on October 28, 2025, self-described Chinese People’s Armed Police (PAP) propaganda
For years, Europe’s discussion of Taiwan has been a diplomatic afterthought, folded into broader debates about China and strategic autonomy. That habit no longer matches reality. What happens in the Taiwan Strait is going to shape Europe’s economy, its security assumptions and its credibility as a community of democracies. The choice is not between war and neutrality. It is between treating Taiwan as a polite footnote or addressing it as a strategic priority. Taiwan is not a distant symbol. It is woven into Europe’s daily life. The nation anchors the global semiconductor supply chain, producing more than 60 percent of the
RSS