本文探討在民意仍支持死刑的狀況下，為何有些國家以某種形 式放棄死刑，有些則否。本研究以台灣與新加坡為案例，展示不同 國家如何處理此一極富爭議的議題。相對於新加坡以高度自信的方 式行使國家主權，台灣在相對孤立的國際關係情勢下，有更強的動 機利用此一議題爭取國際認同。為避免修法帶來激烈的民意反彈， 陳水扁政府以技術性的、停止核准死刑執行的方式，低調地達到廢 除死刑及爭取國際支持的目的。

This paper seeks to examine why some countries have abolished the death penalty while others choose to keep it, given their popular opinions overwhelmingly favoring this tool to pursue justice. Taking Taiwan and Singapore as cases, this study demonstrates different approaches toward this controversial issue. In contrast to Singapore’s self-confidence on exercising its sovereignty, Taiwan has been isolated from international society and thus has stronger incentives to use this issue as a means to attract attention and acknowledgement. Since bluntly abolishing the death penalty might encounter strong political opposition, the Taiwanese government has pursued this goal using a silent approach, i.e. by such administrative means as stopping approval of executions, rather than going through formal, symbolic legislation. By doing so the politicians and ruling party also benefit from gaining a reputation for good human rights records without triggering heated debates on this issue.