Victim Services Association: “Death sentence without execution” is a second degree of harm

The Constitutional Court will hold an oral debate tomorrow on whether the death penalty is constitutional. The Kuomintang held a press conference today (22nd) on “The people will decide whether the death penalty should be abolished! Let’s hear the voices of the victims together.” Vice Chairman of the Taiwan Crime Victims Human Rights Service Association attended the meeting. Xu Fusheng said, “If the victim is sentenced to death and then not executed, it is a secondary injury to the family.” When policymakers consider the death penalty, they should carefully consider the feelings of the victim’s family. After all, they are the parties involved in the incident.

Xu Fusheng said that if the death penalty issue is suddenly declared unconstitutional when there is no consensus in society, it may trigger social opposition and conflicts and cross the boundaries of the separation of powers. He calls on the justices to carefully consider public opinion and the emotions of the victims’ families.

Zhao Weihan, chairman of the Taiwan Crime Victims Human Rights Service Association, questioned, what right does the perpetrator have to deprive the victim of his life? If we do not resolutely oppose the abolition of death penalty today, judicial justice will be on the verge of death. Now the courts do not impose the death penalty, the Ministry of Justice does not carry out the death penalty, and the Crime Victims Protection Association has not said a word for victims in many years. He called on President Tsai Ing-wen, the Democratic Progressive Party and the justices to pay attention to public opinion and not to act arbitrarily.

Li Yanxiu, chairman of the Kuomintang Cultural Communication Committee, said that Xu Zongli, the president of the Judicial Department, publicly stated in 2015: “Abolition of the death penalty is a matter for the political department, and it is not appropriate and should not be expressed by the judicial department.” The Ministry of Justice, under the rule of the Democratic Progressive Party, commissioned a polling company to conduct a survey in 2019. As many as 76.7% of the people in the country do not support the abolition of the death penalty. Even if “life imprisonment without parole” is added in the future, the majority (56.5%) of the people still do not agree with the death penalty. The system has been replaced, which shows that the existence of the death penalty can indeed achieve the purpose of intimidating crime.

Li Yanxiu emphasized that the preservation and abolition of the death penalty should respect public opinion and fall within the scope of legislative power. The Constitutional Court, as a judicial interpretation and review agency for constitutional violations, should not expand its power to replace legislative power. If Xu Zongli wants to use the abolition of death as a graduation gift for Tsai Ing-wen to gain fame before leaving office, the one who will suffer most will be the remaining judicial prestige.

Kuomintang legislator Wu Zongxian advocated the necessity of the death penalty. From the perspective of retribution, it means killing someone to pay for his life. A person with the right to life has no human dignity when he is killed. Death row prisoners go through rigorous trial procedures to protect their due rights. “If you are willing to take away a person’s right to life for no reason, will the country and society have to do it at this time?” To protect your right to life without end? I think this is inappropriate.”

Wu Zongxian pointed out that from the perspective of crime prevention, Wu Zongxian said that the United States, Japan, and South Korea still have the death penalty, but no one says that these countries are not founded on human rights. On the contrary, Russia, which is most often criticized for its human rights issues, does not have the death penalty, so human rights and the death penalty should not be equated. Some scholars have analyzed that every execution of a death penalty can prevent 18 death penalty cases from happening, which is worth thinking about. Finally, the perspective of comforting the victim’s family also needs to be considered. Always remember that the protection of the perpetrator and the victim’s family must be on the same scale.

See more related news
Hear the voices of the victims!The Kuomintang calls on the justices: The people decide whether to retain the death penalty or not
Constitutional Court openly debates the death penalty constitutional interpretation case Chen Jianren: Executive Yuan respects
Victim Services Association: “Death sentence without execution” is a second degree of harm
She became a promoter of the abolitionist movement after witnessing wronged people being executed.
Death row inmates quit smoking and become vegetarians in order to donate as many organs as possible after death