Thu, Oct 23, 2025 page8

• EDITORIAL: Caning no solution to fraud

  • • 
    • 
    • 

  Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Legislator Hung Meng-kai (洪孟楷) last week sparked debate with a Facebook post asking whether public caning could help deter crimes such as fraud and drunk driving in Taiwan.

  Hung wrote that Singapore plans to expand the use of judicial caning — traditionally applied to cases of vandalism and drug offenses — to those convicted of fraud. The policy was prompted by the city-state’s search for a stronger deterrent, as long prison terms had failed to curb such crimes, Hung wrote.

  Drawing parallels with Taiwan, Hung said that corporal punishment might be worth considering.

  His post garnered more than 100,000 likes, indicating public frustration with fraud, but also igniting fierce criticism. Democratic Progressive Party Legislator Chuang Jui-hsiung (莊瑞雄) called the proposal a “step backward” for human rights. Influencer Cheng Tsai-wei (鄭才暐), known as “Cheap,” said that Taiwan has adopted the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which prohibits corporal punishment.

  Aside from the human rights concerns and the poor optics of reintroducing judicial corporal punishment in a democracy that positions itself as the opposite of authoritarian China, it is highly unlikely that public caning would achieve Hung’s goal of deterring fraud.

  It would also face overwhelming public and political resistance. Taiwan’s legal system has grown progressively more liberal. Bringing back physical punishments would clash sharply with that trajectory.

  That said, fraud is indeed a serious and worsening problem, and Hung is right to draw attention to it.

  An op-ed in the Taipei Times (“Rooting out Taiwan’s rampant fraud problem, Aug. 15, page 8) cited a National Audit Office report showing that NT$47.8 billion (US$1.56 billion) was lost to fraud last year alone. Fraud cases have quadrupled in the past three years, but less than 1 percent of those convicted have received sentences longer than three years.

  The problem might not lie in the law, but in how judges interpret articles 46 and 47 of the Fraud Crime Hazard Prevention Act (詐欺犯罪危害防制條例). The articles allow reduced penalties for offenders who voluntarily confess, surrender criminal proceeds or help capture other members of a criminal organization. While intended to encourage cooperation, the provisions are often applied too generously.

  If lawmakers want to deter fraud, they should focus on clarifying and tightening laws, not reverting to corporal punishment. Ambiguous wording could be revised so that sentencing is commensurate with the scale of harm, taking into account the amount defrauded and the number of people affected.

  Punishments should also aim to prevent reoffending. Those who commit fraud abroad or are involved in human trafficking should face travel bans.

  Offenders who use electronic means could be restricted from using computers or the Internet, except for essential daily needs. Those whose crimes involved cryptocurrency, or illegally obtained bank accounts or e-payment cards, could be barred from using those financial tools.

  Hung is correct to highlight the urgent need to combat fraud, but caning would not fit Taiwan’s modern values nor be effective. Research from countries that still employ corporal punishment shows no clear link between its use and lower crime rates.

  Rather than resorting to spectacle or cruelty, Taiwan should focus on consistent sentencing, clearer legislation and restorative measures that hold offenders accountable while preserving human dignity. Real deterrence lies in the certainty of punishment, not in its brutality.
• Most Popular

  • 1

    Taipei to join Japan, US response to rare earth ban

  • 2

    Torrential rain expected this week, the CWA says

  • 3

    Urban mining could evade China’s grip

  • 4

    Notes from Central Taiwan: Taiwan’s intergenerational conflict

  • 5

    Northern cities to decide school/work cancelations by 8pm