2024/4/23 10:34 (updated at 4/23 13:07)
The trial on the constitutional interpretation of the death penalty, which affects the preservation and abolition of the death penalty, was held on the 23rd. All 37 death row inmates filed petitions, claiming that the death penalty violated the right to survival and the principle of proportionality guaranteed by the constitution. Lawyer Li Nianzu (pictured) served as the petitioner’s litigation representative.Photographed by Central News Agency reporter Xu Zhaochang on April 23, 113
(Central News Agency reporter Liu Shiyi, Taipei, 23rd) Wang Xinfu and other 37 death row inmates believed that the death penalty provision was unconstitutional and petitioned for an interpretation of the constitution. The Constitutional Court held an oral debate today. The petitioner’s attorney (lawyer) Li Nianzu and 16 others attended the court. Related agencies The Ministry of Justice, led by Prosecutor General Guo Yongfa, appeared in court to argue.
The abolition of the death penalty has always been a topic of public concern. Especially when major criminal cases occur in Taiwanese society, whether to abolish the death penalty or execute it will become the focus of social discussion. There are currently 37 death row inmates in Taiwan who have not yet been executed. They claim that the death penalty violates the constitutional right to equality, the right to survival, and the principle of equality, etc., and they are petitioning for a legal review of the constitution.
The Constitutional Court held oral arguments today. A total of 16 death row inmate litigation attorneys appeared in court, including Li Nianzu, Li Xuanyi, Li Jianfei, Gao Yanghui, Li Ailun, Weng Guoyan, Chen Siyu, Lin Xinping, Luo Kai, Wang Shuli, Liu Jiwei, Zhuang Jiaheng, Xue Weiyu, Zhou Yuxiu , Wang Baoli and Lin Junhong.
The Legal Department of the relevant agency was led by Procurator-General Guo Yongfa, Deputy Director Jian Meihui, Chief Prosecutor Li Zhongren, and Supreme Procuratorate Prosecutor Lin Liying to appear in court for debate.
In addition, the court was originally occupied by 15 justices including Xu Zongli. Considering that Justice Cai Jiongdun had tried the case of death row inmate Wang Hongwei, Cai Caizhen had participated in the case of death row inmate Wang Baiying, and You Boxiang had served as the defender of death row inmate Qiu Heshun, after three people recused themselves, the court There are only 12 justices.
Six experts and scholars appeared in court, including researchers Huang Chengyi and Xu Jiaxin of the Institute of Law of Academia Sinica, Professor Zheng Shanyin of the School of Law and Department of Law of Kainan University, Professor Xie Yuwei of the School of Law of National Taiwan University, Distinguished Professor Yan Jue’an, and the Department of Crime Prevention and Control of National Chung Cheng University. Professor Lai Yonglian of the Institute of Science and Technology.
In addition, Gao Yongcheng from the National Human Rights Commission of the Supervisory Yuan, the appraisal agency, appeared in court, and Chen Shuzhen, a lawyer from the Crime Victims Protection Association, an appraisal group, appeared in court to express his opinions.
The Constitutional Court plans to open the hearing on the death penalty interpretation case at 10 a.m., with opening statements from the plaintiff’s attorney and representatives from the Ministry of Justice, and then arrange for experts, scholars, appraisal agencies and representatives of groups to present their opinions. Then there will be cross-examination, with the claimant questioning the Ministry of Justice, experts and scholars, appraisal agencies and groups, and then the Ministry of Justice questioning the claimant, experts, scholars, appraisal agencies and groups.
The justice’s questions and answers began at 2:30 p.m. for 90 minutes, and finally the claimant and the Ministry of Justice each gave 15 minutes of closing arguments. (Editor: Zhang Mingkun) 1130423
Central News Agency “First-hand News” app
The text, pictures and videos on this website may not be reproduced, publicly broadcast or publicly transmitted and used without authorization.
