By Chen Jun-kuang 陳俊光
A tragedy occurred last week when a 15-year-old boy driving without a license in Taipei’s Neihu District (內湖) struck a restaurant, killing three. Furious citizens have called for the death penalty or corporal punishment for the teenager.
While absurd at first glance, the situation’s development provides some explanation as to why people might raise such an impossible proposition.
Although the perpetrator’s father verbally apologized following the incident, he did not attend the memorial ceremonies of the victims, nor did he attempt to compensate their families. Instead, he hired a renowned lawyer to defend his son.
Additionally, several of the perpetrator’s relatives all coincidentally reported to the media that the boy, surnamed Zeng (曾), was always a smart and well-behaved child. They said that he was very cute when he was younger, and that this accident has been a huge blow to his family. However, they shared no sympathy or remorse for the victims.
What is even more bizarre is that after some commentators criticized the bias in these media reports — while making no comments about the child himself — a great number of the articles were reported and removed. Some are speculating as to whether the articles were removed with the help of a public relations firm that might have created fake accounts to report them.
Similar scenarios have occurred in the past — for example, there were previously a large number of fake accounts based in Russia and the Middle East devoted to liking posts about Taiwan People’s Party Chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲).
In recent decades, many advanced countries have promoted restorative justice, hoping for a process by which the perpetrators show accountability, engage in self-reflection, sincerely apologize, and adequately compensate the victims of a crime.
Under the premise that criminal procedure is not affected, restorative justice remedies the harm done and helps victims heal their physical and emotional wounds as much as possible, additionally preventing the likelihood of reoffense.
However, genuine self-reflection of perpetrators is the main criterion for the success of this great system. If a perpetrator or their family would rather spend copious amounts of money hiring a big name lawyer to influence the judicial process, or hire a public relations firm to manipulate public opinion, than earnestly compensate the victims, such a system would be impossible to implement.
Instead, it would give rise to radical discourse — like suggesting corporal punishment or the death penalty for minors — or even result in illegal retaliation. We could find ourselves in a tragedy like the one in the movie Seeking Justice, in which everybody only suffers more harm — an outcome that would benefit no one.
The Korean drama Juvenile Justice tells us that the more wealthy and powerful a family, the more likely they are able to hire a renowned lawyer to lighten the sentence of their offending child. In turn, their children are discouraged from examining their own mistakes, and these young offenders are even less likely to take responsibility for their actions in the future.
When children like this become adults, they would inevitably face greater disaster and end up paying an even heavier price. Before a child unfortunately ends up inside juvenile court, their parents must teach them to bear responsibility for their own behavior.
Chen Jun-kuang is an attending physician in the psychiatry department at Shin Kong Wu Ho-Su Memorial Hospital.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen