Gender Inequality, Sexual Violence, and State Responses: Comparative Sex Offender Governance in Seven Jurisdictions

Abstract

Sexual violence represents a complex intersection of individual criminality and systemic gender inequality. This study conducts a multi-jurisdictional comparative analysis of sex offender governance across seven diverse legal systems: the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Germany, India, Indonesia, and Taiwan. Grounded in feminist criminology and comparative criminal justice, the research evaluates four critical governance domains: registration and notification systems, validated risk assessment protocols, mandated treatment modalities, and post-sentence preventive detention frameworks. The analysis reveals that while Western jurisdictions (e.g., U.S. and U.K.) emphasize punitive surveillance and public notification, Taiwan’s "Four-Key Therapy" model offers a distinctive evidence-based approach that integrates clinical rehabilitation with multi-agency supervision. Empirical data from Taiwan, including remarkable low recidivism rates in specific regional pilots, suggests that a transition from "punitive symbolism" to "professional governance" can enhance public safety without compromising legal proportionality. The findings indicate that stronger institutional responses to sexual offending are positively associated with broader indices of gender equality and state capacity. By highlighting the efficacy of Taiwan’s integrative model within a comparative framework, this article provides critical insights for policymakers and forensic mental health professionals seeking to optimize sex offender management through a balance of therapeutic intervention and legal oversight.