Human Rights and Transitional Justice: Taiwan’s Adoption of the ICCPR and the Redress of 2/28 and Martial-Law-Era Injustices

Abstract

Article 2(3) of the ICCPR obligates States Parties to “ensure that any person whose rights or freedoms as herein recognized are violated shall have an effective remedy,” which shall be “determined by competent judicial, administrative or legislative authorities, or by any other competent authority provided for by the legal system of the State,” and enforced by “the competent authorities.” Taiwan’s adoption of the ICCPR therefore raises issues about appropriate redress for injustices associated with the authoritarian period of Kuomintang rule, including most prominently the atrocities committed in the aftermath of the 28 February 1947 uprising. Coming to terms with the past is an indispensable component of the consolidation of a political order predicated on the irreducible dignity of the human person. This human rights obligation can be fulfilled even when too much time has passed for criminal prosecutions to be undertaken and even when the political party associated with the perpetrators retains a substantial political role.