With the COVID-19 pandemic abating, all kinds of restrictions have been lifted, and wearing masks is no longer compulsory.
When people take public transportation or go to government offices, they have the option of putting on their masks. It is their decision.
Members of the public no longer look askance at people who are not wearing a mask. Nowadays, wearing a mask tends to be regarded as completely up to the individual’s discretion, out of their own concern for their health.
This kind of social perception has become a new norm in the post-COVID-19 pandemic era. Wearing masks or not becomes a personal decision that nobody can interfere with it, nor would regulations limit it. Modern society is a self-reflective organism, lumbering along and redefining the rules of interpersonal relations as it goes.
However, owing to the need for effectiveness and the search for truth in the first round of criminal investigations, I, as a lawyer, suggest that the government require suspects to remove their masks when being interrogated for the entire questioning session.
Generally, suspects are only asked to remove their masks to confirm their identity. After this part of the process, it is left to them whether they wish to continue wearing a mask.
People should be aware that non-linguistic factors, such as facial expressions, tone of voice, eye movements and body language can be more effective than verbal language for determining when somebody is telling the truth.
If the suspect is wearing a mask, these non-linguistic clues are less apparent. The interrogator cannot observe their face and expressions, nor can they apply interrogation techniques to find “the essence of the truth.”
This often means that the interrogation process is of little practical use and serves only as a formality. The wearing of masks allows deceitful suspects to hide behind a layer of protection while being interrogated, concealing facial tics and shifty eyes, trying to stabilize their voice fluctuations to falsify and cover their crimes.
It works both ways. People who are unfamiliar with being interrogated might be unaware of the pros and cons of wearing a mask, and might be unwittingly covering up movements that the interrogator might otherwise read as an indication of innocence.
The ancient Chinese philosopher Mencius (孟子) once said the best way to judge one person is to look into their eyes, for eyes cannot conceal the evil in one’s mind.
This is sound advice indeed, and one that is relevant to criminal investigations in the post-COVID-19 pandemic era.
Lee Yen-feng is a lawyer.
Translated by Lee Chieh-yu
A response to my article (“Invite ‘will-bes,’ not has-beens,” Aug. 12, page 8) mischaracterizes my arguments, as well as a speech by former British prime minister Boris Johnson at the Ketagalan Forum in Taipei early last month. Tseng Yueh-ying (曾月英) in the response (“A misreading of Johnson’s speech,” Aug. 24, page 8) does not dispute that Johnson referred repeatedly to Taiwan as “a segment of the Chinese population,” but asserts that the phrase challenged Beijing by questioning whether parts of “the Chinese population” could be “differently Chinese.” This is essentially a confirmation of Beijing’s “one country, two systems” formulation, which says that
“History does not repeat itself, but it rhymes” (attributed to Mark Twain). The USSR was the international bully during the Cold War as it sought to make the world safe for Soviet-style Communism. China is now the global bully as it applies economic power and invests in Mao’s (毛澤東) magic weapons (the People’s Liberation Army [PLA], the United Front Work Department, and the Chinese Communist Party [CCP]) to achieve world domination. Freedom-loving countries must respond to the People’s Republic of China (PRC), especially in the Indo-Pacific (IP), as resolutely as they did against the USSR. In 1954, the US and its allies
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi arrived in China yesterday, where he is to attend a summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and Russian President Vladimir Putin today. As this coincides with the 50 percent US tariff levied on Indian products, some Western news media have suggested that Modi is moving away from the US, and into the arms of China and Russia. Taiwan-Asia Exchange Foundation fellow Sana Hashmi in a Taipei Times article published yesterday titled “Myths around Modi’s China visit” said that those analyses have misrepresented India’s strategic calculations, and attempted to view
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) stood in front of the Potala Palace in Lhasa on Thursday last week, flanked by Chinese flags, synchronized schoolchildren and armed Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) troops, he was not just celebrating the 60th anniversary of the establishment of the “Tibet Autonomous Region,” he was making a calculated declaration: Tibet is China. It always has been. Case closed. Except it has not. The case remains wide open — not just in the hearts of Tibetans, but in history records. For decades, Beijing has insisted that Tibet has “always been part of China.” It is a phrase
RSS