In a landmark decision that is reigniting public debate on Taiwan’s capital punishment system, the Supreme Court of Taiwan on Friday revoked the death sentence of Liang Yu-chih (梁育誌), who was convicted in the high-profile rape and murder case of a Malaysian student in 2020. This case not only shocked Taiwan and Malaysia but also became a legal test case following the September 2024 Constitutional Court ruling which held that the death penalty is conditionally constitutional.
🔍 Case Background: A Crime That Gripped Two Nations
The crime occurred on October 28, 2020, in Tainan, where the 24-year-old victim — a Malaysian university student — was walking near her campus when she was abducted by Liang. The investigation later revealed that Liang premeditated the attack, lying in wait with a rope. He then raped, beat, and strangled the victim, and after stealing her belongings, he dumped her body in a remote area of Kaohsiung’s Alian District.
Initially, the Ciaotou District Court sentenced Liang to death in March 2022 for rape, murder, and robbery, and this ruling was upheld by the Kaohsiung Branch of the High Court in March 2023. However, the Supreme Court sent the case back for retrial in June 2023, citing flaws in the legal analysis of rape and homicide charges.
⚖️ Supreme Court’s Latest Ruling: What Changed?
The April 2025 ruling now fully revokes the death sentence, highlighting the following critical flaws in the High Court’s earlier decision:
- Improper Legal Framing:
The lower court treated the case as a single offense of rape-murder, rather than multiple distinct crimes (rape, robbery, and murder), which require separate legal scrutiny and sentencing. - Inadequate Review of Motive and Intent:
The Supreme Court noted that evidence suggested Liang may have initially planned only a sexual assault, with murder being a subsequent decision. This could significantly alter how intent is interpreted under Taiwanese criminal law. - Ignored Psychological Evaluation:
A prison counselor’s assessment indicated that Liang might be rehabilitable, but this was not factored into sentencing, which undermines the requirement for courts to evaluate the full spectrum of evidence before deciding on the most severe punishment.
📌 Why This Case Matters
This case is not just about one individual or one horrific crime—it taps into broader questions about Taiwan’s legal system:
- Should capital punishment be applied when rehabilitation potential is present?
- How should courts balance the need for justice in brutal crimes against the defendant’s rights?
- What precedent does this set following Taiwan’s Constitutional Court ruling in 2024 that declared the death penalty conditionally constitutional?
The decision reflects Taiwan’s evolving legal standards and shows the Supreme Court’s increasing demand for procedural thoroughness and proper sentencing frameworks. It also invites new debate over how the courts interpret intent, remorse, and rehabilitation potential—key issues in any modern criminal justice system.
🔄 What Happens Next?
A new trial will be held, and prosecutors may still seek the death penalty, but this time the court must individually assess each criminal charge and take into account Liang’s mental state, rehabilitation potential, and all relevant psychological and social factors. Public opinion is also likely to play a role, as this case remains emotionally charged both in Taiwan and Malaysia.
❓ FAQs
Why did the Supreme Court revoke the death sentence?
Because the previous court failed to treat rape, robbery, and murder as separate crimes, didn’t assess the suspect’s intent accurately, and ignored psychological evaluations that may have supported a lesser sentence.
Does this mean Liang is no longer guilty?
No. The conviction still stands. Only the sentencing is under review, and a new trial will be held to determine appropriate punishment.
What is the significance of the Constitutional Court’s 2024 ruling on this case?
It confirmed that the death penalty is constitutional under strict conditions, prompting courts to ensure that such sentences are issued with comprehensive legal analysis and justifications.
Will Liang be sentenced to death again?
It’s possible but less certain. The retrial must account for his intent, potential for rehabilitation, and separate charges—which could lead to a reduced sentence, such as life imprisonment.
How has the public reacted?
There is public outrage and emotional response, especially from women’s rights groups and Malaysian citizens, who see the crime as a grave injustice demanding the harshest penalty.
