Taiwanese are rightfully proud that, despite the nation’s challenging regional environment, their country is a beacon of liberal, democratic values, and the just application of the rule of law.
In 2016, the Washington Post commented that Taiwan’s national elections that year had “cemented this island’s standing as one of Asia’s most progressive and tolerant places.”
Not only had Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) become Taiwan’s first female president, women had won almost one-third of its legislative seats. Indigenous communities were also well represented, in sharp contrast to some other democracies, such as Australia and New Zealand.
Since then, Taiwan has become the first country in Asia to recognize same-sex marriage.
Taiwan’s progress is all the more noteworthy when one considers the abysmal human rights record of the People’s Republic of China (PRC). The era of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) has seen unprecedented levels of surveillance of ordinary citizens, the genocide of the Uighurs and the crushing of political freedoms in Hong Kong, in flagrant disregard of the treaty by which Britain handed it over to PRC control in 1997.
However, there remains one issue on which Taiwan lags much of the rest of the democratic world — its retention and continued use of the death penalty.
Having conducted original research in Taiwan in this field, we have come to Taipei this week to engage with politicians, policymakers and Taiwan’s free media. We hope to encourage a debate over abolition that is already well underway, thanks in large part to the efforts of our partner organization, the Taiwan Alliance Against the Death Penalty (TAEDP), and to present evidence and arguments to show why this ultimate penal sanction should no longer be administered.
The trend globally is only in one direction — toward abolition. Of the world’s 198 countries, only 29, Taiwan included, have executed a prisoner in the past 10 years. A total of 46 countries are what the UN calls “abolitionist de facto,” meaning no one there has been executed in a decade or more.
The other 123 countries have abolished the death penalty in law and more add themselves to this list almost every year. Last year, three developing nations from sub-Saharan Africa did so: Chad, Equatorial Guinea and Zambia. The number of US states that retain capital punishment has also fallen — from 38 at the turn of the century to 27 now — and in those that maintain the death penalty, executions have diminished in number, along with public support.
The same can be said of Taiwan. Since Tsai assumed office, there have been just two executions, as opposed to 33 in the eight years of the previous administration.
As for the PRC, its number of executions is a state secret, but human rights groups, such as Amnesty International, believe that China’s annual total remains the world’s highest, and runs to thousands every year.
The time is ripe for Taiwan to do the right thing and abolish capital punishment. Moreover, TAEDP’s joint research suggests that Taiwanese support for the death penalty is weak, and that the government could take this step without provoking an inflamed public reaction.
In 2019, we published a study revealing alarming failings in Taiwan’s criminal justice system, and highlighted the real risk that innocent people could be killed by the state owing to evidential or procedural flaws. We also conducted a survey which found that 71 percent of Taiwanese would not oppose abolition of the death penalty if it were replaced by life imprisonment without parole. Moreover, respondents’ initial support for capital punishment fell dramatically when they were informed about the risk of wrongful convictions.
The following year, the University of Oxford and Soochow University conducted a further study examining the views of Taiwan’s legislators. Remarkably, 61 percent of those interviewed personally supported abolition of the death penalty, and of the 39 percent against, only one individual felt strongly that Taiwan should keep capital punishment.
Many legislators were aware of the risk of wrongful convictions and of the concerns raised in our 2019 report. Indeed, most said they believed wrongful convictions do sometimes occur.
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. Just one individual chose “more executions.”
However, when they were first interviewed, most of the legislators had assumed that public opinion was still strongly in favor of retention. When they were shown the results of our 2019 study suggesting that this was mistaken, their support for abolition jumped from 61 to 81 percent, an overwhelming majority.
Reflecting its broader, liberal stance, Taiwan has already taken the first legal step toward abolition by incorporating the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights into its domestic law. This obliges it “not to delay” abolition.
The US Supreme Court sometimes makes decisions on the basis of what is termed “evolving standards of decency.” It is a concept applicable internationally. For example, at the start of this century, no country had legally recognized same-sex marriage. Now 30 do, mostly advanced nations in Europe and North America, and of course, Taiwan.
A century ago, very few countries had abolished the death penalty, although Venezuela became the first to do so as far back as 1863.
With only 17 percent of the world’s nations continuing to sentence prisoners to death and, sometimes, to execute them, Taiwan’s retention of capital punishment looks increasingly like an aberration, a deviation from its admirable, progressive path.
Having already recognized the benefits of adhering to international human rights standards, abolition of the death penalty would further enhance Taiwan’s reputation and standing with like-minded democracies.
Carolyn Hoyle is a professor of criminology at the University of Oxford and director of the Death Penalty Research Unit. Saul Lehrfreund is coexecutive director of the Death Penalty Project and a visiting professor of law at the University of Reading.
Chinese agents often target Taiwanese officials who are motivated by financial gain rather than ideology, while people who are found guilty of spying face lenient punishments in Taiwan, a researcher said on Tuesday. While the law says that foreign agents can be sentenced to death, people who are convicted of spying for Beijing often serve less than nine months in prison because Taiwan does not formally recognize China as a foreign nation, Institute for National Defense and Security Research fellow Su Tzu-yun (蘇紫雲) said. Many officials and military personnel sell information to China believing it to be of little value, unaware that
Before 1945, the most widely spoken language in Taiwan was Tai-gi (also known as Taiwanese, Taiwanese Hokkien or Hoklo). However, due to almost a century of language repression policies, many Taiwanese believe that Tai-gi is at risk of disappearing. To understand this crisis, I interviewed academics and activists about Taiwan’s history of language repression, the major challenges of revitalizing Tai-gi and their policy recommendations. Although Taiwanese were pressured to speak Japanese when Taiwan became a Japanese colony in 1895, most managed to keep their heritage languages alive in their homes. However, starting in 1949, when the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) enacted martial law
“Si ambulat loquitur tetrissitatque sicut anas, anas est” is, in customary international law, the three-part test of anatine ambulation, articulation and tetrissitation. And it is essential to Taiwan’s existence. Apocryphally, it can be traced as far back as Suetonius (蘇埃托尼烏斯) in late first-century Rome. Alas, Suetonius was only talking about ducks (anas). But this self-evident principle was codified as a four-part test at the Montevideo Convention in 1934, to which the United States is a party. Article One: “The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: a) a permanent population; b) a defined territory; c) government;
The central bank and the US Department of the Treasury on Friday issued a joint statement that both sides agreed to avoid currency manipulation and the use of exchange rates to gain a competitive advantage, and would only intervene in foreign-exchange markets to combat excess volatility and disorderly movements. The central bank also agreed to disclose its foreign-exchange intervention amounts quarterly rather than every six months, starting from next month. It emphasized that the joint statement is unrelated to tariff negotiations between Taipei and Washington, and that the US never requested the appreciation of the New Taiwan dollar during the
RSS