English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Social protests present democracies with a dilemma because their governments must balance respect for citizens’ right to free expression against maintenance of law and order. Drawing on litigation data from Taiwan between 1999 and 2018, this study empirically examines how Taiwanese courts decided on cases involving social protesters. Aggregate results reveal that Taiwan’s district courts convicted about 60% of the protesters prosecuted by the state, and approximately 93% of those found guilty were given probationary instead of prison sentences. There was a significant association between the type of crime with which they were charged and the court rulings, although that relationship varied over time. Considerable evidence consistently suggests that Taiwanese courts may be attempting to find a middle ground in trials involving social protesters, one in which the society’s laws and the individual’s right to dissent are both given due respect. This study concludes that further comparative research is needed to determine whether Taiwan’s judicial response to contentious political episodes is comparable to that of other democracies.

Protesters on trial: examining factors influencing district court decisions in social protest litigation in Taiwan