The Taiwan Constitutional Court held an open and fierce debate on Wednesday (April 23) whether the death penalty was unconstitutional. There will be a judgment within three months.As about 80 % of the mainstream public opinion opposed the abolition of the death penalty, once the court ruled that the death penalty was unconstitutional, it would have a profound impact on society and politics.
The promotion of abolition, Taiwan independence and non -nuclear homes are all listed on the Democratic Progressive Party's party, which is regarded as the Democratic Progressive Party's "God Lord".Although Taiwanese law has not been abolished, it is a "substantial waste" state that has almost no death penalty.
In the past five years, the 476 killing case has been sentenced to death together.Four years ago in Taiwan's death penalty, Weng Renxian, who was shot arson and burned six relatives and friends.
All 37 death prisoners in Taiwan have not yet been sentenced. They jointly asked the judge to explain whether the death penalty was unconstitutional.Among them, the 72 -year -old most death prisoner Wang Fu, who was sentenced to two police officers 13 years ago, wrote a letter to the judge through a lawyer to "hope to win the decision of the death penalty and seek a first -line vitality."
The Taiwan Constitutional Court made a five -hour public live broadcast on Wednesday to conduct this century debate that was regarded as closest to abandonment, allowing all parties to state a position and confrontation.
The two major debates announced by the Constitutional Court.1. Is the death penalty unconstitutional?Except for the deprivation of the right of life, do you interfere with the rights of other constitutions?What are the purpose of the death penalty system?Does the Constitution allow the death penalty as a means to achieve this purpose?If the death penalty is determined to be unconstitutional, what is the way to replace the criminal sanctions of the death penalty?Or what kind of supporting measures should be taken?
2. If the constitution of the death penalty is determined, is there any type of crime in the dying penalty, or what kind of crime type is applicable?Is there restrictions on the scope of criminal defendants for death penalty?What kind of supporting procedures should the death penalty meet the requirements of the legitimate procedure of the Constitution?
The focus of the comprehensive spark splash, the death rowing lawyer group believes that it cannot be susceptible to violence, and the judge does not have the right to kill.The proportion of the people in favor of the death penalty dropped to 51.8 percentage points, indicating that the alternative to abolishing the death penalty can continue to be improved.
The Ministry of Justice of Taiwan advocates that the public opinion who oppose the abolition of death far exceeds supporters. The existence of the death penalty is determined by administrative or legislators, and it should not be handled through unconstitutional review.The Ministry of Justice also pointed out that the "influential countries" such as the United States, Japan, and Singapore still have the death penalty. Asian countries also generally have the death penalty system. In the past five years, the judgment was determined by the 476 killing case.The judgment process is rigorous.
Of the 15 judges in Taiwan, the three had participated in the trial or defense of the death row case, so they avoided participating in the trial.Finally, the collegial panel is formed by 12 judges, and only seven votes can determine whether the death penalty is unconstitutional.
Xu Zongli, the dean of Taiwan, announced the judgment within three months after the debate between the two sides, and it was necessary to be extended for two months.
Because the court has set the constitution of the death penalty for three times in the past, the case of the time for the time of the presidential and legislators elections in January 2024, and Tsai Ing -wen is about to step down, it will inevitably cause heated discussions.Seven of them will also step down in October this year.
Comprehensive comments, Tsai Ing -wen tends to handle abolition issues through constitutional interpretation procedures. Seven of the 12 judges of the 12 trials have clearly abolished their stance.First, before the president and the judges stepped down, they worked hard to advance in the direction of abolition, and also minimized the damage to Lai Qingde.
Although the polls show that 80%of the public opinion opposes the abolition, and the victim's family members are as high as 96.7%of the opposition to abolition, but there are scholars and judges who support the abolition of abolition."Double public opinion", so "may not be compromised with most public opinion."In the past, Taiwanese laws also passed the same -sex marriage and adultery in disputes. Although more than half of public opinion opposed same -sex marriage and adultery, they were eventually ruled by the judges.
However, once the law is determined that the killing does not need to pay for the killing, the people's grievances will inevitably boil, and even the social phenomenon of "criminal criminal".In the Legislative Yuan, which is only half a party, it is estimated that it will also refuse to cooperate with the law, and even launch a referendum of anti -waste death to impact the credibility of the Lai Qingde government who is about to come to power.
