Press Release | Cases of Death Due to Delayed Medical Treatment in Custody Occur Repeatedly: JRF Urges Control Yuan to Conduct a Thorough Investigation and Call for Public Case Submissions

In 2012, the Control Yuan issued Investigation Report No. 101-Szu-Tiao-0046 regarding "medical deficiencies in prisons and detention centers, which seriously affect the right to life of inmates." However, 13 years have passed, and the problem clearly remains unaddressed in substance. Recently, the Judicial Reform Foundation received three separate petitions from family members reporting cases in which inmates and detained defendants allegedly died after correctional institutions ignored warning signs of illness and delayed sending them for medical care.

Believing these incidents are by no means isolated, the Foundation submitted a statement to the Control Yuan today, sincerely urging it to reopen an investigation to clarify whether relevant administrative agencies have been negligent in the performance of their duties and whether there are major omissions in safeguarding the human rights of inmates in custody.

I. Three Consecutive Cases of Death Due to Delayed Medical Treatment Highlight the Collapse of the Prison Medical System

The three petitioned cases occurred respectively in the Taipei Prison, Taichung Detention Center, and Changhua Detention Center under the Agency of Corrections, Ministry of Justice:

(1) Case of Inmate Chiu at Taipei Prison: Suspected failure to follow medical advice to return for follow-up, with delayed treatment allegedly leading to death from cerebral hemorrhage

Inmate Chiu collapsed and lost consciousness in his prison cell on July 12, 2025 (hereafter all dates refer to 2025 unless specified otherwise), and remained intermittently unresponsive after being sent to the hospital. However, Taipei Prison (hereinafter referred to as Taipei Prison) failed to notify his family, who only learned of the incident three days later through the family of a cellmate.

Furthermore, when family members subsequently visited and found Chiu's condition continuing to deteriorate, they repeatedly raised the issue with Taipei Prison, only to be stalled with reasons such as "observation is sufficient" and "it's not up to the family to decide." This ultimately caused them to miss the golden window for treatment. A subsequent review of the hospital emergency diagnosis certificate showed medical advice stating that if the patient experienced obvious discomfort, he should return for a detailed examination; yet Taipei Prison remained indifferent. Late at night on July 18, Chiu was rushed to the hospital in an emergency and diagnosed with a ruptured cerebral aneurysm complicated by subarachnoid hemorrhage leading to central nervous system failure. He passed away on August 1.

(2) Case of Detained Defendant Chung at Taichung Detention Center: Died of cancer after months of seeking medical attention, with family kept uninformed of complete medical information

Beginning in March, Defendant Chung successively exhibited warning signs of cancer such as hematuria, difficulty urinating, and weakness, yet Taichung Detention Center only arranged sporadic examinations and non-specialist outpatient visits. Chung did not receive hormone therapy and CT scans from Pei Teh Hospital, affiliated with Taichung Prison until his condition had deteriorated, confirming that cancer cells had metastasized. He ultimately passed away after vomiting fresh blood. Moreover, among Chung's personal effects kept at Taichung Detention Center was a diagnostic certificate that his defense attorney had never seen, indicating severe information blocking by Taichung Detention Center, which had failed to maintain open communication with the family or defense attorney throughout the period, while the relevant medical procedures were also severely opaque.

(3) Case of Detained Defendant Chou at Changhua Detention Center: Left unattended for half an hour after calling for help, pronounced clearly deceased upon arrival at the hospital

On the evening of October 30 at 20:26, Defendant Chou waved his hand for help and repeatedly tried to communicate with personnel outside the cell door; surveillance footage at the time showed Chou was in extreme physical distress. Furthermore, when Chou collapsed at 20:54 and the cell door was unlocked, surveillance footage showed that correctional officers did not immediately administer first aid, but instead carried Chou away to a blind spot of the surveillance camera. Although personnel at Changhua Detention Center claimed that first aid had been administered, no footage of first-aid administration appeared.

In addition, Yuanlin Christian Hospital, the hospital closest to Changhua Detention Center, is less than one kilometer away, yet Chou did not arrive at the hospital until 21:28, by which time he was clearly deceased and exhibited livor mortis.

II. Correctional Institutions Shirk Responsibility: Earnest Appeal to the Control Yuan to Take the Matter Seriously and Clarify Whether Relevant Agencies Committed Omissions

Although the surviving family members of Defendant Chung had previously petitioned the Control Yuan for an investigation, the attitude of Taichung Detention Center during the investigation was evidently evasive, not only downplaying severe pressure ulcers as "common complications of terminal cancer," but also attempting to shift the responsibility for failing to promptly notify the family onto the hospital or lawyers. Although the detention center insisted that "medical interventions were provided on as many as 55 occasions," our review found that up to 35 of those instances were family medicine outpatient visits lacking the specialization required for end-stage cancer treatment—data that is highly likely to be misleading. As a detained defendant, Chung's right to life was disregarded in this manner, yet this case was ultimately closed perfunctorily with "no necessity for an additional administrative investigation," which is deeply regrettable.

The Foundation believes that this is by no means an isolated case, but rather a systemic deficiency within the correctional system. Therefore, combining these three death cases, the Foundation once again submits a statement to the Control Yuan, sincerely requesting the Control Yuan to take this matter seriously and clarify whether Taipei Prison, Taichung Detention Center, and Changhua Detention Center committed administrative omissions when inmates and detained defendants in custody sought necessary medical resources. The Foundation also hopes that the Control Yuan will clarify relevant medical decision-making processes, the attribution of reporting responsibilities, and systemic issues within the prison medical system in order to comprehensively establish the administrative responsibilities of the relevant agencies.

III. Out-of-Prison Medical Treatment Must Not Become "Release to Die": The Foundation Calls for Cases to Promote Medical Human Rights in Correctional Institutions

The investigation report issued by the Control Yuan in 2012 already pointed out that domestic correctional institutions face a clear shortage of both established staffing and current personnel for medical professionals (physicians, nursing staff, pharmacists, medical laboratory scientists, etc.), and that the Ministry of Justice and the former Department of Health both bore suspicions of inadequate supervision regarding the assessment mechanisms, standard operating procedures, criteria for determination, and the maintenance of sound medical records associated with medical parole.

Moreover, the health divisions of most domestic correctional institutions are staffed only by general practitioners, lacking the capacity for diagnosis and tracking for chronic illness or tumor patients; referrals require cumbersome hierarchical reviews, resulting in delayed treatment for emergency patients. As seen in the case of detained defendant Chung at Taichung Detention Center, even proximity to Pei Teh Hospital, affiliated with Taichung Prison apparently still resulted in delayed medical treatment leading to death by cancer. Coupled with extremely closed information flow between correctional institutions and families—such as in the case of inmate Chiu at Taipei Prison, where the family was not notified in a timely manner, causing them to lose the opportunity to intervene and provide rescue—did the delayed medical transfer or failure to promptly notify family members despite knowing the condition was serious constitute administrative negligence and a grave violation of human rights?

Within a short span of three months, the Foundation successively received three cases of inmates and detained defendants dying due to delayed medical treatment. While two of these cases were approved for medical parole, the individuals passed away within a month of leaving the facility, and one case even involved death inside the cell with livor mortis present before being sent to the hospital. These individual cases undoubtedly attest to the insufficient medical capacity of correctional institutions. Thirteen years have passed, and relevant administrative agencies have still failed to review and improve the systemic, long-standing structural problems existing in the medical care and human rights protection of correctional institutions, leaving uncorrected the tragedy of "medical parole" degenerating into "parole to die."

Every inmate inside a correctional facility, regardless of status, is a citizen protected by the Constitution. The Foundation once again calls upon the Control Yuan to conduct an in-depth investigation into related responsibilities, and demands that the Ministry of Justice and the Agency of Corrections face squarely the reality of the long-term collapse of the prison medical system, establish external oversight and professional review mechanisms, and truly return medical care to the safeguarding of human rights.

"Medical care is not a privilege but a human right; the state has the responsibility to ensure that every person deprived of liberty still enjoys basic medical protection behind the walls."

To promote institutional reform, the Foundation has specifically incorporated prison medical rights advocacy case types into our "JRF Emergency Room" project, and solemnly calls upon all sectors of society and the families of inmates to actively provide relevant cases to jointly assist in supervising improvements in the correctional system. The Foundation is broadly seeking the following types of cases and welcomes those who meet the conditions to contact us through defense attorneys or family members:

I. Defendants in Custody

Those who experienced severe health problems, and whose defense attorneys or themselves filed applications with the court for medical parole or release on bail pending trial, only to be rejected.

II. Released Defendants

Those who have been released from detention, but encountered delayed medical treatment, improper handling, or deterioration of condition while in custody.

III. Inmates Serving Sentences

Those who met any of the circumstances under Paragraph 1, Article 3 of the Regulations Governing Review Criteria for and Management of Prisoners' Out-Of-Prison Medical Treatment on Bail, yet had their applications for medical parole rejected, or suffered from clearly inadequate treatment or deterioration of condition within the facility.

The Foundation will provide assistance based on the circumstances of each case, hoping to jointly promote institutional reform advocacy and implement medical human rights in correctional facilities.

Press Conference Time

Monday, November 17, 9:30 AM

Press Conference Location

Main Entrance of the Control Yuan (No. 2, Sec. 1, Jhongxiao E. Rd., Jhongzheng Dist., Taipei City)

Attendees (in order of speaking)

• Lin Chang-tso, Attorney ｜ Executive Committee Member, Judicial Reform Foundation
• Shih Hung-cheng, Attorney ｜ Standing Executive Committee Member, Judicial Reform Foundation
• Lo Shih-hsiang, Attorney ｜ Convener of the Prison Grievance and Institutional Reform Panel, Judicial Reform Foundation
  

Press Contacts

Chang Hua-che, Director of Case Action Department, Judicial Reform Foundation 02-23225255#22 ven@jrf.org.tw

Chen Kuan-chen, Legal Officer of Case Action Department, Judicial Reform Foundation 02-23225255#21 olivia@jrf.org.tw