It’s a dilemma for the Minister of Justice, and it’s a dilemma for all
Statement / Taiwan Alliance to End the Death Penalty / March 12, 2010
'I never blamed those who claim their support for the death penalty in public. It’s a moral choice to stand for or against the death penalty and the choice belongs to one’s conscience. What bothers me is that, an intellectual, a self-proclaimed abolitionist is content to retain the death penalty, just because the public poll and opinion are for it.'
~ A public letter to Minister of Justice of the France, Robert Badinter, 1977
Taiwan Alliance to End the Death Penalty expressed its deep regrets to the matter that the oral resignation rendered by the Minister of Justice Wang Ching Feng yesterday has been accepted by the Premier Wu Den Yih and the President Ma Ying Jeou.
Minister Wang Ching Feng has expressed her personal position supporting abolition of the death penalty in her inauguration. After the ICCPR and the ICESCR were ratified in Taiwan, she continued the policy on gradual abolition of the death penalty, carefully examined cases convicted to death and imposed the moratorium of executions. She also established the taskforce on research and promotion of gradual abolition in the Ministry of Justice which aims to bring in academics, experts and stakeholders on this issue to have a deep discussion and form the alternative measures to replace the death penalty. We pay contribute to this initiation and express our deep regrets for her sudden step-down last night.
We call on the President’s Office, the Executive Yuan, the Legislative Yuan and the parties in governance and in opposition do put the short-term interests of elections ahead of the issue, but stand on the values of human rights and think carefully for the next step that Taiwan should take.
International Prospect Not Only for Economics but for Human Rights
Taiwan is aggressive to join in the international economic cooperation and has signed the ECFA economic deal with China. Taiwan is open in the economic filed but isolated from the human rights ideologies. Taiwan is not member of the UN, but we can’t exclude ourselves from the international society. We can’t disregard the UN resolutions endorsed in 2007 and re-endorsed in 2008, calling for global moratorium on the use of the death penalty; we can’t either disregard the fact that so far 139 countries over the world have accepted de facto or de jure abolition; we certainly can’t disregard, what Professor William Schabas proposed in the UN quinquennial report which will be published in June, that the goal of universal abolition might be achieved between 2015 to 2025. Taiwan might slow down or adjust its path, but we keep walking on the way to abolition.
Continuous Discussions on Alternative and Supplementary Measures Needed
It is not easy to achieve the abolition of the death penalty. “Those who kill will pay with their lives,” this traditional value is deeply grounded. It can only be changed through a long-term dialogue and continuous clarifications. Therefore, we cannot decide whether to keep or to abolish the death penalty just by public opinion shown in one period of time. Though we often think democracy involves the desire of the citizenry, facing a complicated topic like this one, we need public discussions and debates to present the real will of the people.
The President and the Executive Yuan both recognize the abolition of death penalty as a “long-term” goal. However, there should be step-by-step course to reach the final goal. Accordingly, continuous discussions on alternative and supplementary measures cannot stop. The taskforce on abolishing the death penalty of the Ministry of Justice should carry on their mission to come up with proper alternative measures and help the masses to understand the issue to guide Taiwanese society toward the right direction.
A Full Defendant System for Death Row Inmates
The President and the Executive Yuan also stated that the use of death penalty would gradually be decreased by amending the law. The death penalty is a punishment that deprives the right to life. Under the condition that the death penalty is still imposed, the most restricted duo process should be used upon the capital cases before the death sentence is rendered. We demand that following amendments should be taken: 1. Death penalty sentencing should be decided unanimously by the court, 2. the verbal debates of the two parties should be held at the level of the Supreme Court 3. The legal presentation for death penalty cases at the third trial should be provided compulsively.
The Expectation to the Future Minister of Justice
The legislator Hsieh Kuo-Liang said that, “It is nothing but massacre to execute 44 people!” We hope the new minister not to take over the seat to kill but carefully exercise his or her power in accordance with the Criminal Procedure Law and the two UN Covenants. TAEDP will continue our assistance in the legal procedures for death row inmates who have received their final sentencing to appeal for their rights. .
Member Organizations of TAEDP:
Taiwan Association for Human Rights(TAHR), Judicial Reform Foundation(JRF), Taipei Bar Association(TBA), Taiwan Law Society, Chang Fo-Chuan Center for the Study of Human Rights, Amnesty International Taiwan, John Paul II Peace Institute, Green Party, Regional Tibetan Youth Congress, Taiwan(RTYC Taiwan)
