Constitutional Court rules public insult offense constitutional

Taipei, April 26 (CNA) The Constitutional Court ruled on Friday that the offense of publicly insulting someone is constitutional, but is limited to instances where it causes damage to another person's social reputation or personal dignity, beyond what a reasonable person could be expected to endure after reviewing a total of 24 related cases.

Previously, media figure Feng Guang-yuan (馮光遠) made public remarks that led to private prosecutions filed by former Mainland Affairs Council Chairman Sheng Chih-jen (盛治仁) and former National Security Council Secretary-General King Pu-tsung (金溥聰) based on accusations of them being publicly insulted.

A court found Feng guilty of this offense. Similarly, writer Chang Ta-chuen (張大春) was convicted by another court for comments made about late media figure Liu Jun-yao (劉駿耀).

However, Feng, Chang, and several other parties involved in similar cases, as with some criminal court rulings, argued that the public insult offense under the Criminal Code violates constitutional freedom of speech and personal liberty, as well as the principle of unambiguous law.

They argued that it also contradicts international conventions on civil and political rights, making the offense of publicly insulting someone unconstitutional. As a result, they petitioned for a constitutional interpretations or for related legal provisions to undergo constitutional review.

According to the court's ruling, eight of the cases appealed by the individuals were upheld; however, if the rulings are not applicable within the constitutional scope as outlined, the defendants can ask the chief prosecutor to file an extraordinary appeal.

As for four other cases appealed by the individuals involved, the judges ruled that the convictions did not align with the ruling, returning them to the lower courts.

As for the 12 other cases appealed by the judges, the court determined that they should continue to be heard by the relevant courts.

The court explained that the instances deemed constitutional are those that do not contribute positively to public discourse or serve another beneficial purposes.

It added that simply insulting someone during an argument, such as calling them "bastard" or "vulgar," may not rise to the level of public insult. However, it clarified that the context, tone, and reason for the argument should be considered, including the individual's age, gender, educational level, occupation and social status.

It is not appropriate to automatically classify all instances of profanity as constituting a public insult solely based on the use of "foul language," the court ruled.

According to Article 309 of the Criminal Code, the offense of public insult is punishable by imprisonment or a fine of up to NT$9,000 (US$276).

Common practices include using profanity, derogatory terms, insults related to physical appearance or intelligence, which are sufficient to degrade the dignity and social reputation of others. Section 2 of the rule stipulates that a person who by violence or a physical act commits such an offense should be punished by imprisonment or a fine of up to NT$15,000.