Abolishing death penalty is right; but new laws needed
Editorial
Abolishing death penalty is right; but new laws needed
Wednesday, February 10, 2010, The China Post
When the Governor of the United States (U.S.) state of Massachusetts, Michael Dukakis, was running for president in 1998, a pivotal moment came during a debate between Democratic nominees.
The debate's moderator asked Dukakis the following question: “Governor, if Kitty Dukakis [his wife] were raped and murdered, would you favor an irrevocable death penalty for the killer?” Dukakis' reply may have been the final nail in his doomed campaign. “No, I don't,” he answered. “I think you know that I've opposed the death penalty all of my life,” Dukakis said before launching into an in-depth explanation of his stance on the issue. Some political commentators believe that answer cost Michael Dukakis the election against Republican candidate, George H.W. Bush. An ordinary man's answer to the question on what he would want to happen to a person who raped and murdered his wife would be that he wants the perpetrator to die — preferably a slow and painful death. Even those who don't support the death penalty would have a desire for vengeance if an immediate family member were to be victimized in such a horrible way. It's a natural human reaction.
That said, society cannot tolerate vigilante justice and stopping people from meting out what they think a perpetrator “deserves” is one of the functions of the justice system. All over the world,there have been clan feuds based on “justice” that have lasted for years. A murder would be responded to by two murders and two murders by four and so on and so on for decades. Today when a crime is perpetuated we call upon a higher authority — our legal system — to adjudicate. Recently in Taiwan an 18-year-old girl died. This girl had been the victim of a sexual assault at the tender age of five. The attack this girl suffered was so horrible that this column cannot print the particulars, but this unfortunate child was forced to undergo multiple operations and many years of pain before dying aged 18. The person who committed this crime was never found, but if he had been captured, what punishment is severe enough for such an evil creature? If we think about it, a quick and generally painless execution is too good for a criminal like this. But, modern society has rightly decided that torturing someone to death, for example, is unacceptable. The point is that the death penalty is not what a sadistic criminal “deserves;” they deserve far worse.
Actress Bai Bing-bing was in the news recently claiming — in what we hope was hyperbole — she would commit suicide if Taiwan goes through with a plan to phase out capital punishment. Bai also volunteered to act as an executioner. Bai's emotional response is completely understandable; in 1997 her young daughter was kidnapped, tortured and killed by the infamous rapist, murderer and kidnapper, Chen Ching-hsing, who was executed in 1999. Taiwan's Minister of Justice, Wang Ching-feng, said that there are no plans to immediately abolish capital punishment in Taiwan, but that the international trend is moving away from executions. In fact there have been no applications of the death penalty in Taiwan since 2006, but 44 inmates remain on death row. For now Taiwan has, in practice, suspended capital punishment.
It is difficult to try and convince many people that the death penalty is an outmoded form of justice, even though many studies have proven that capital punishment is not a deterrent to serious crime. Recently, several American states suspended their use of the death penalty after troubling findings that may end up proving that innocent people have been executed. These academic issues mean nothing to a family that has suffered a loss due to violent crime. The justice minister is correct in saying that Taiwan should move away from capital punishment, but before we can take the final step of abolition, Taiwan's laws must be changed so that its people can feel confident that should a heinous crime occur, the perpetrator will remain behind bars — possibly forever. A troubling recent case involved the murder of a kindergarten teacher. The man who killed her had killed a previous girlfriend some 16 years earlier and had been sentenced to roughly nine years in prison. Owing to a change in Republic of China (R.O.C.) law, the man was released after serving less than three years. He then killed again. A murderer receiving a sentence of less than ten years in prison is unfathomable.
As we understand it, Taiwan does not currently have a “life-without-the-possibility-of-parole” statute as many other nations do. Taiwan's lawmakers should make revising sentencing laws a major priority. All too often we hear of cases where a person commits a serious criminal offense — such as killing someone while driving drunk — and receives only a light sentence. Moving away from the death penalty is “the right thing to do.” However, before Taiwan's people can feel confident in supporting the abolition of capital punishment, they must be convinced that criminals will pay for their crimes. Taiwan's government must look into establishing or enforcing a law that allows serious offenders to be given a sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole.