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.
There is much evidence that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is sending soldiers from the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to support Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — and is learning lessons for a future war against Taiwan. Until now, the CCP has claimed that they have not sent PLA personnel to support Russian aggression. On 18 April, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelinskiy announced that the CCP is supplying war supplies such as gunpowder, artillery, and weapons subcomponents to Russia. When Zelinskiy announced on 9 April that the Ukrainian Army had captured two Chinese nationals fighting with Russians on the front line with details
On a quiet lane in Taipei’s central Daan District (大安), an otherwise unremarkable high-rise is marked by a police guard and a tawdry A4 printout from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs indicating an “embassy area.” Keen observers would see the emblem of the Holy See, one of Taiwan’s 12 so-called “diplomatic allies.” Unlike Taipei’s other embassies and quasi-consulates, no national flag flies there, nor is there a plaque indicating what country’s embassy this is. Visitors hoping to sign a condolence book for the late Pope Francis would instead have to visit the Italian Trade Office, adjacent to Taipei 101. The death of
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), joined by the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), held a protest on Saturday on Ketagalan Boulevard in Taipei. They were essentially standing for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), which is anxious about the mass recall campaign against KMT legislators. President William Lai (賴清德) said that if the opposition parties truly wanted to fight dictatorship, they should do so in Tiananmen Square — and at the very least, refrain from groveling to Chinese officials during their visits to China, alluding to meetings between KMT members and Chinese authorities. Now that China has been defined as a foreign hostile force,
On April 19, former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) gave a public speech, his first in about 17 years. During the address at the Ketagalan Institute in Taipei, Chen’s words were vague and his tone was sour. He said that democracy should not be used as an echo chamber for a single politician, that people must be tolerant of other views, that the president should not act as a dictator and that the judiciary should not get involved in politics. He then went on to say that others with different opinions should not be criticized as “XX fellow travelers,” in reference to
RSS