On December 19th, Vice Chairperson Tsai Chung-yi represented the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) as an expert witness at the Constitutional Court in the case of Petition No. 333 (2020). This case addresses the revocation of parole and the enforcement of remaining life imprisonment sentences. The petition questions the constitutionality of Article 79-1, Paragraph 5 of Taiwan’s Criminal Code, along with Articles 7-1(2) and 7-2(2) of the Enforcement Act of the Criminal Code. The NHRC presented its insights based on the principles of international human rights law.
Vice Chairperson Tsai contended that in the context of revoking parole for individuals serving life sentences, it is essential for the law to consider both legal and practical avenues for potential sentence reduction. Existing regulations, which enforce a predetermined remaining sentence upon the revocation of parole, do not adequately account for various factors, including the duration served prior to parole, the inmate's degree of adjustment, the likelihood of reoffending, and the success of rehabilitation efforts. This inflexible application of a remaining sentence could result in prolonged incarceration without just cause, potentially infringing upon Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which prohibits torture and inhumane or degrading treatment.
Tsai further suggested that if the legislation under which the life sentence was initially enacted has been either repealed or modified, the updated, less severe sentence should be enforced. In instances where life sentences have been substituted with lesser penalties, the applicable regulations regarding the remaining duration of life imprisonment should cease to be relevant following the annulment of parole. This approach upholds the principle of proportionality in criminal law and prevents any infringement of Article 7 of the ECHR, which forbids the imposition of a more severe penalty than that which was in effect at the time the crime was committed, especially in relation to the retroactive application of reduced penalties.
Finally, Tsai emphasized the importance of reevaluating the regulations that dictate modifications to the execution of outstanding sentences following the revocation of parole. It is crucial to focus on the manner in which residual sentences are aggregated with other sentences as this may inadvertently broaden the extent of punishment associated with life imprisonment. This could risk a breach of the prohibition against the retroactive imposition of harsher penalties, as stipulated in Article 7 of the ECHR.
The NHRC called for a reassessment and modification of the pertinent sections of the Criminal Code to align with international human rights standards, thereby enhancing the safeguarding of human rights and the establishment of equitable criminal justice policies.