In a significant ruling, Taiwan’s Constitutional Court has upheld the legality of the death penalty while simultaneously placing strict limits on its application. While acknowledging the constitutionality of capital punishment, the court emphasized that its use should be reserved for “special and exceptional circumstances,” specifically highlighting cases involving serious crimes such as murder. This decision comes in response to petitions filed by numerous death row inmates who argued that the punishment violates the country’s constitution.
The court’s ruling underscores the gravity of the death penalty, stating that due to its irreversible nature, its application and the procedural safeguards surrounding it require rigorous scrutiny. Chief Justice Hsu Tzong-li, during the announcement of the decision, highlighted that the death penalty, being the most severe form of punishment, should be used only in extremely serious cases.
The court also addressed the issue of mental health in relation to the death penalty, stating that defendants with mental conditions, even if they do not influence their offense, should be exempt from capital punishment. Furthermore, the court declared that death row inmates with mental conditions that impair their competency for execution should not be executed.
Taiwan’s method of carrying out the death penalty involves shooting an inmate in the heart from behind while they are lying face-down on the ground. This method has been criticized as inhumane. Since lifting a moratorium on capital punishment in 2010, Taiwan has executed 35 individuals, with the most recent execution occurring in April 2020. The latest execution involved a 53-year-old man convicted of setting a fire that killed his family.
The court’s decision to uphold the death penalty while restricting its use to exceptional cases reflects a complex legal and ethical debate surrounding capital punishment. The court’s emphasis on procedural safeguards and the exemption of mentally ill individuals underscores a commitment to protecting individual rights within the context of a legal system that retains the death penalty.
