I am in Taiwan on a mission on behalf of the Global Committee for the Rule of Law, a Rome-based association named after the late Marco Pannella, an Italian civil rights leader and member of the European Parliament. The committee is chaired by former Italian minister of foreign affairs, Senator Giulio Terzi di Sant’Agata.
Having learned that the Constitutional Court of Taiwan is to spend several months deliberating the issue of the death penalty and its legality, my mind rushed back to the international movement that led to the adoption of a UN moratorium on capital punishment in 2007.
Back in 1993, Pannella established an association called Hands Off Cain to convince the Italian government and other cosponsors to introduce a resolution at the UN General Assembly (UNGA) promoting a one-year moratorium on all capital punishment.
Fourteen years later, the resolution was presented at the UNGA and the vote was successful.
These were 14 years of debating, lobbying MPs and governments, collecting statistical evidence and negotiating over two main messages: First, the death penalty is not a reliable deterrent. Second, the goal was not immediate abolition, but rather an official one-year moratorium to be renewed on a yearly basis until the time was ripe for full abolition.
In 2007, the UNGA adopted the moratorium with 104 votes in favor while 54 opposed, and it has taken a vote every two years ever since. In 2022, when the last vote took place, the number of states in favor increased to 125 and the number of those who opposed fell to 37.
Since 2007, the adoption has seen major progress and reveals a clear trend: It is striking that the US still votes in favor of capital punishment alongside autocracies like Iran, Iraq, North Korea and China. If it was possible for Taiwan to join the UN, one could only wonder how Taipei would instruct its representatives ahead of the vote for a moratorium in the assembly of the international community.
Indeed, the evidence collected in countries where no executions were carried out for several years showed that crime rates were not impacted significantly.
“The murder rate in non-death penalty states has remained consistently lower than the rate in states with the death penalty,” the Death Penalty Information Center said.
As Virginia Democratic state assembly member Marcus Simon said during a debate to abolish the death penalty in the US state, “the government should not be in the business of killing human beings.”
Deterrence could also be achieved through alternative measures, including life imprisonment. It would also rule out the possibility of executing an innocent defendant.
Sure, societies present many differences. However, by saying “no” to violence, the state becomes the guardian of life under all circumstances. It sets a concrete example and sends the message that killing has no place in any society.
With the exception of one execution carried out in 2020, Taiwan has not put anybody to death for about a decade. Thus, it seems to me that a de facto moratorium is already in place. If the majority of Taiwanese are still in favor of the death penalty, a process of familiarization with a hypothetical reform might be underway.
Should change come, the adoption of a moratorium — to be confirmed or suspended on a one-year basis — is a path worth exploring. It is also a democratic path that nurtures the rule of law that Taiwan proudly embodies.
Mateo Angioli is a political advisor to Italian Senator Giulio Terzi and secretary general of the Global Committee for the Rule of Law “Marco Pennella” of the Italian Senate.
With each passing day, the threat of a People’s Republic of China (PRC) assault on Taiwan grows. Whatever one’s view about the history, there is essentially no question that a PRC conquest of Taiwan would mark the end of the autonomy and freedom enjoyed by the island’s 23 million people. Simply put, the PRC threat to Taiwan is genuinely existential for a free, democratic and autonomous Taiwan. Yet one might not know it from looking at Taiwan. For an island facing a threat so acute, lethal and imminent, Taiwan is showing an alarming lack of urgency in dramatically strengthening its defenses.
As India’s six-week-long general election grinds past the halfway mark, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s messaging has shifted from confident to shrill. After the first couple of phases of polling showed a 3 percentage point drop in turnout, Modi and his party leaders have largely stopped promoting their accomplishments of the past 10 years — or, for that matter, the “Modi guarantees” offered in the Bharatiya Janata Party’s (BJP) manifesto for the next five. Instead, making the majority Hindu population fear and loathe Muslims seems to be the BJP’s preferred talking point. Modi went on the offensive in an April 21
The people of Taiwan recently received confirmation of the strength of American support for their security. Of four foreign aid bills that Congress passed and President Biden signed in April, the bill legislating additional support for Taiwan garnered the most votes. Three hundred eighty-five members of the House of Representatives voted to provide foreign military financing to Taiwan versus only 34 against. More members of Congress voted to support Taiwan than Ukraine, Israel, or banning TikTok. There was scant debate over whether the United States should provide greater support for Taiwan. It was understood and broadly accepted that doing so
I still remember the first time I heard about the possibility of an invasion by China. I was six years old. I thought war was coming and hid in my bed, scared. After 18 years, the invasion news tastes like a sandwich I eat every morning. As a Gen Z Taiwanese student who has witnessed China’s harassment for more than 20 years, I want to share my opinion on China. Every generation goes through different events. I have seen not only the norms of China’s constant presence, but also the Sunflower movement, wars and people fighting over peace or equality,