Cirach Anthony G. Marcelo
III ± St. Augustine
Millicent Millicent Nicole G. Amistoso
February 27, 2012
Death Penalty: To Impose Or Not To Impose? Death Penalty is a kind of capital punishment which refers to the sentence of death over a person who has been decided by the government as guilty of committing capital crimes or offences. Death penalty penalty in the Philippines dates back to the Spanish and American colonial periods, present in various forms such as burning, decapitation, drowning, flaying, garrote, hanging, shooting, stabbing and others. This punishment by death has continued for years with the same rules until President Ferdinand Marcos raised the number of capital crimes to 24 including arson, possession of firearms and illegal fishing through the Death Penalty Law. In 1987, Philippines Philippines became the first country in Asia to abolish death penalty for all crimes under the jurisdiction of the late Pres. Corazon Aquino and punishment for capital crimes is reduced to reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment under Article 3 Section 9 of the constitution. Under the leadership of Pres. Fidel Ramos, death penalty was again re-imposed through the Republic Act # 7659 or the Heinous Crimes Law wherein capital offences is subject to death either via electrocution electrocut ion or gas chamber . During the regime of Pres. Estrada, the lethal injection injection law or Republic Republic Act #8177 was put into action. This continued until the reign of Pres. Macapagal Arroyo. However, in 2006, Pres. Arroyo signed the Republic Act #9346 entitled "An Act Prohibiting the Imposition of Death Penalty in the Philippines´ which eliminates all other republic republic acts and laws regarding death penalty and commuted 1,230 death row inmates into life imprisoned imprisoned criminals. The latest move about the death penalty took place August 2010 when Sen. Miguel Zubiri submitted the Senate Bill #2383 which states the re-imposition of death penalty. But the said bill was met with negative reactions both by the Senate and by Pres. Noynoy. I and my partner decided to go against the re-imposition of the death penalty because of the following reasons: first, it violates the right to live and damages the Filipinos¶ morals; second, death penalty is anti-poor; third, death penalty defeats its purpose and lastly, it only shows the incapability of the Philippine government. Death penalty violates a person¶s person¶s right to live. According to Article 3 Section 1 of the 1987 Constitution, otherwise known as the Bill of Rights, ³No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property«". Imposing the death penalty would violate the said bill. We should also put in mind that the Philippines is predominantly Catholic and killing a person, whether guilty or not, is against the law of God. As the CBCP once said, ³¶Di sagot ang pagpatay sa mga kriminal sa isyu ng paglabag sa batas. Ang dapat patayin ay ang sanhi ng paggawa ng immoralidad, at yun ay ang kahirapan, kagutuman at kawalan ng trabaho´. trabaho ´. Another issue raised by the CBCP is the conscience of the people executing the death penalty. According to an interview with an executioner, what once was a conscience-wrecking act became a normal routine in his life ² and that is killing criminals. Death penalty does not only violate the right of people to live, it also damages the morals of the people assigned to execute the inmates. Secondly, death penalty is anti-poor. In a third world country like the Philippines, most law-breakers were undergoing poverty and hunger and sometimes, they are innocent people unjustly accused by the true criminals. Most of the criminals sentenced to die were not given the chance of choosing their own lawyers mostly because of the fact that they cannot afford it. This just shows that not all of those criminals executed were rightfully guilty. Their stories have been told and re-told on newspaper clippings. One example is Fernando Galera. Fernando Galera was
supposed to be the first ever inmate to be executed instead of Leo Echegaray. But at the last minute, Galera was saved and charged innocent. What if the declaration was 5 minutes late? The execution was irreversible, and Galera could have been dead by then. There is also the incident of Carlos Gorbilla, a corn vendor who was sentenced to death only minutes after being accused of rape, even without enough evidences. Was he guilty or innocent? The court never found out, but he was executed instantly. This just proves that death penalty is really anti-poor because of the unjust trials and giving out of death sentences to innocent or wrongly accused people who cannot afford to pay good lawyers to defend them. Death penalty robbed the criminals a chance to fight for their freedom. Thirdly, death penalty beats its purpose of eliminating or decreasing the crime rate in the Philippines. According to newspaper clippings and web articles that we read, the crime rate in the Philippines during the implementation of the death penalty steadily rose instead of decreasing. This shows that the harsh punishment implemented was not effective. Instead of spreading fear to all crime makers, it seems that it has only raised a thrilling and inviting challenge for them. It also destroyed its purpose of maintaining peace and order. Instead, it has raised arguments and issues raised by pro-life groups, religious organizations and the families of criminals begging for justice. The implementation of death penalty served justice to only a handful of individuals, but for the others, it has only raised hatred and vengeance. Lastly, death penalty shows the ineffectiveness of the Philippine government. The implementation of the death penalty law shows the government is incapable of making the citizens follow the law. As stated earlier, crime rates continued to increase with the implementation of death penalty. If the law handed out by the government is ineffective, then what is the sense of re-imposing it today when clearly, no major change on the constitution has happened? As political science major Vertine Beler puts it, ³Whether death penalty is reimposed or not, criminals will continue to commit crimes with little fear or restraint, as long as the police is inept and the justice system is so frustratingly slow.´ To sum it all up, we are against the re-implementation of the death penalty law because of four reasons. Death penalty robs the criminals a right to live, a right to defend themselves and a right to build a new life. It also damages our morals as Filipinos and as Catholics, making us hug a culture of blood and death. More importantly, death penalty defeats its purpose of eliminating crimes and as showed by the trial and error period during the reign of Pres. Marcos to Pres. Arroyo, death penalty did nothing to improve the quality of justice we have in the Philippines. We believe that more than 10 years of experimenting with the law is enough ² death penalty is clearly not the answer to the country¶s crime problems. "An execution is not simply death. It is just as different from the privation of life as a concentration camp is from prison. It adds to death a rule, a public premeditation known to the future victim, an organization which is itself a source of moral sufferings more terrible than death. Capital punishment is the most premeditated of murders, to which no criminal's deed, however calculated can be compared. For there to be an equivalency, the death penalty would have to punish a criminal who had warned his victim of the date at which he would inflict a horrible death on him and who, from that moment onward, had confined him at his mercy for months. Such a monster is not encountered in private life." Albert Camus---"Reflections on the Guillotine, Resistance, Rebellion & Death" (1956).
Cirach Anthony G. Marcelo
III ± St. Augustine
Millicent Nicole G. Amistoso
February 27, 2012
RESOURCES: A. Clippings: a. Roses and Thorns Article by Alejandro Recos b. Kultura ng Pagpaslang by Reuel Aguila c. Are Filipinos really this bloodthirsty by Neal H. C ruz d. Pope condemns death penalty e. Ipaglaban Mo Article by Atty. Sison B. Book: a. When the State Kills: The Death Penalty vs. Human Rights by the Amnesty International C. Websites: a. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_debate b. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_the_Philippines c. http://www.chanrobles.com/republicactno7659.htm d. http://wiki.lawcenter.ph/index.php?title=Death_penalty e. http://pcij.org/blog/2006/04/18/a-timeline-of-death-penalty-in-thephilippines f.
http://www.helium.com/items/68046-death-penalty-in-the-philippines
g. http://the-diplomat.com/asean-beat/2011/01/24/philippines-death-penalty back/ h. http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/breakingnews/nation/view/20110119315382/Aquino-against-death-penalty i.
http://www.gluckman.com/Death'Penalty.htm
