On Friday, Taiwan’s Constitutional Court decided to keep the death sentence while underlining that its application should be restricted to “special and exceptional circumstances.” Although it upholds the death sentence, this decision adds tougher rules to guarantee that its application stays a last resort only in extreme, exceptional circumstances. The decision followed a lawsuit brought forth by the 37 prisoners presently on death row in Taiwan, which spurred a discussion about the future of the death sentence in that nation.
Taiwan’s Capital Punishment History
Progressive democratic Taiwan has kept the death sentence as a legal tool of justice. A moratorium was abolished in 2010; since then, the nation has executed 35 people, the most recent in April 2020 when a 53-year-old man was hanged for starting a fire that claimed his family. From behind, executed in Taiwan, the condemned inmate is shot in the heart, a technique that has attracted criticism for its cruel character. Long opposing this practice, anti-death penalty advocates have claimed it breaches fundamental human rights.
Death row prisoners trying to have the death sentence declared unconstitutional brought up the case the court examined. The Constitutional Court did, however, reject this more general appeal and instead limited the circumstances under which the death sentence might be executed. Speaking during a thorough reading of the court’s ruling, Chief Justice Hsu Tzong-li said, “while the death sentence remains a form of capital punishment, its scope of application should be limited to special and exceptional circumstances.”
Tight Rules for Death Penalty
In its declaration, the court noted that although a basic protection guaranteed by Taiwan’s constitution, the right to life is not unqualified. The court underlined even more that any application of the death sentence has to be closely examined since it is the most severe and permanent kind of punishment. Particularly when the offense involves murder, this entails exhaustive reviews all through the judicial procedure, from investigation to execution.
Significantly, the decision refrained from discussing the legitimacy of the death sentence with respect to other grave crimes as treason or drug-related crimes. The court also decided that individuals with mental illnesses compromising their competency for execution should not be subject to the death sentence. Furthermore, those currently on death row who have serious mental health problems might not be put to death under these fresh rules.
Public Opinion and Government Reaction
Viewing the court’s decision as a “important milestone” in the development of Taiwan’s justice system, Taiwanese President Lai Ching-te greeted it with welcome. By means of a statement sent by presidential spokesman Karen Kuo, the president expressed hope that pertinent government agencies will change current laws to conform with the court’s ruling, guaranteeing the country upholds procedural justice and human rights.
Notwithstanding the court’s ruling, public awareness and the legal system of Taiwan still heavily rely on capital punishment. The nation’s criminal laws now have almost fifty clauses stating capital penalty as the maximum sentence, and once all appeals have been run through, executions are executed without notice. Reflecting its ongoing popularity in public opinion of justice, a recent poll by the Chinese Association for Human Rights revealed that eighty percent of the Taiwanese population supports the retention of the death sentence.
Still, not everyone embraced the decision. Lawyers from the Judicial Reform Foundation, which supports the abolition of the death sentence, Lin Yong-song voiced dismay over the court’s ruling. He noted that although most people agree the death sentence upholds law and order, crime rates in Taiwan have actually dropped recently even as the number of executions has dropped. Lin’s group keeps arguing that the death sentence is not required to lower crime rates and aims to change public view toward appreciating life.
Reflecting these ideas, Hsinyi Lin, executive director of the Taiwan Alliance to End the Death Penalty, said that although they appreciate the court’s verdict, they regret that it fell short in declaring the death sentence unlawful. Following the court’s decision, Lin and other human rights advocates promised to keep informing the people on the need of preserving life and substituting other policies for the death sentence at a news conference.
Progressive Image of Taiwan and Historical Context
Globally, Taiwan has become known as a shining example of Asian progressive values. 2019 saw the first nation in the area legalize same-sex marriage, therefore strengthening its reputation as a progressive nation. Still, capital punishment is a delicate topic in the country shaped by cultural customs anchored in Confucian principles. Jimmy Hsu, a death sentence specialist, claims that ancient Chinese justice was frequently based on revenge, especially exacting retribution for the death of a close relative. In Taiwan today, where many still consider the death sentence as a necessary form of vengeance, these strongly rooted cultural beliefs still impact public opinion.
Hsu pointed out in his remarks to AFP that although Taiwan has made great progress in advancing human rights and progressive policies, the traces of a post-Confucian culture still show themselves especially in relation to the interpretation and application of justice.
Ahead in Motion
The decision of the Constitutional Court to keep the death sentence but limiting its application shows a complex attitude on the application of capital punishment in Taiwan. By limiting its application to “exceptional cases,” the court has recognized both the necessity to preserve human life and the conviction that some offenses might call for the most severe kind of punishment. The discussion over the death sentence is probably going to continue as Taiwan advances with this decision since supporters on both sides aim to determine the course of justice in their nation.
While campaigners fight for the death sentence’s ultimate repeal, Taiwan’s government will start the process of amending rules to guarantee that it is administered only in the most severe and unique circumstances.
