death penalty in accordance with the philippine constitution Bill of RightsFull description
Death Penalty in the PhilippinesFull description
death penaltyFull description
What is the position of death penalty or death as punishment for any crime in India?
This is just the outline of my speech for my assignment. i took it for several blog, sorry dont have reference.Full description
The Death Penalty in India- An Analysis By: Saurabh SinhaFull description
Death Penalty Petition PaperFull description
2016 Senior Project on the impact of westernization in the Philippines.
Biscuits in the Philippines continues to compete with chocolate confectionery. Many consumers continue to consume biscuits, usually chocolate-coated biscuits, as a cheaper alternative to chocolate ...
Industry studyFull description
Death Penalty in the Philippines Santos Lamban, PAHRA
The Philippines was the first Asian country that abolished the death penalty in 1987. But six years after it has reimposed reimposed the death death penalty, penalty, the Philippin Philippines es has oerta!en oerta!en its Asian nei"hbors and has the most number of death conicts. The repeal of death penalty penalty came about with with the promul"atio promul"ation n of a new #onstituti #onstitution on after the ouster ouster of the $arcos dictatorship. The lesson of $artial %aw, underscored by the more than 1&,&&& ictims who were either tortured, disappeared or summarily executed, was that the state alone should not be "ien the awful power of life and death oer its citi'ens. (ithin less than a year, howeer, the military establishment was was lobbyin" for its reimposition as a means to combat the )intensifyin") offensies of the #PP*+PA "uerrillas. en. -idel . /amos, then #hief of the Armed -orces of the Philippines and later elected President of the Philippines in 1990, was amon" those who were stron"ly callin" for the reintroduction of the death penalty a"ainst rebellion, murder and dru" traffic!in". n mid 1987, a bill to reinstate the death penalty was submitted to #on"ress. $ilitary pressure was ery much eident in the preamble which cited the pestering the pestering insurgency as well as the recommendations of the police and the military as compelli compellin" n" reasons reasons for the reimposition reimposition of the death penalty. penalty. The bill cited cited recent ri"ht win" coup attempts attempts as an exampl example e of the alarming alarming deteriora deterioration tion of peace peace and order order and ar"ued ar"ued for the death penalt penalty y both both as an effective deterrent against heinous crimes and crimes and as a matter of simple retributive justice . The bill which was promoted as a counter2insur"ency bill was passed by the 3ouse of /epresentaties in 1988. Three similar bills, introduced in 1989 failed to "et approal of the 4enate and the bill was sheled into the archies. 3oweer, 3oweer, in the precedin" precedin" fie years, public opinion, opinion, articulate articulated d by leadin" leadin" political political fi"ures fi"ures had been flowin" flowin" in the direction of support for the death penalty as a form of 5retributie 6ustice5. A series of horrific, widely publici'ed publici'ed crimes includin" rape, murder and !idnappin"2for2ransom reinforced public fears that lawlessness and criminality had reached unprecedented leels. The tabloid reports painted a bloody picture, widely reportin" on hi"h profile murder, rape and !idnappin" cases. The iew that the death penalty was necessary to fi"ht criminality became a popular notion. (hen /amos was elected as President in 1990, he declared that the reimposition of the death penalty would be one of his priorities. Political offenses such as rebellion were dropped from the bill. 3oweer, the list of crimes was expanded to include economic offenses such as smu""lin" and bribery. n ecember 199, /A 7:9 restorin" the death penalty was si"ned into law. The law ma!ers ar"ued the deterioratin" crime crime situatio situation n was a compelin" compelin" reason for its reimposit reimposition. ion. The main reason "ien was that the death penalty is a deterrent to crime. n 199, /A 8177 was approed, stipulatin" lethal in6ection as the method of execution. Six years after %ast -ebruary :, 1999, %eo ;che"aray, a house painter, was executed for repeatedly rapin" his stepdau"hter. 3e was the first conict to be executed since the re2imposition of death penalty in 199:. 3is 3is execut execution ion spar!ed spar!ed once once a"ain a"ain a heated heated debate debate betwee between n the anti and the pro2de pro2death ath penalty penalty forces forces in the Philippines with a hu"e ma6ority of people callin" for the execution of ;che"aray. That there was a stron" clamor for the imposition of the death penalty should be iewed from the point of iew of a citi'en who is desperately see!in" ways to stop criminality. The ;strada administration peddled the death penalty as the antidote to crime. The reasonin" was that if the criminals will be afraid to commit crimes if they see that the "oernment is determined to execute them.
-rom 199> to 199: the number of persons on death row increased from 10 to 1&>. -rom 199: to 199 it increased to 180. n 1997 the total death conicts was at :0& and in 1998 the inmates in death row was at 781. As of +oember 1999 there are a total of 9: death conicts at the +ational Bilibid Prisons and at the #orrectional nstitute for (omen. As of ecember 1, 1999, based on the statistics compiled by the ;piscopal #ommission on Prisoner (elfare of the #atholic Bishops #onference of the Philippines, there were a total of 9 conicts interned at the +ational Bilibid Prisons and another 0 detained at the #orrectional nstitute for (omen. cases inolin" & inmates. were affirmed with finality, while the remainin" were "ien first affirmation. 4ixty nine percent [email protected] or 101 cases were either modified, acCuitted or remanded for retrial. ;i"hty four 8> cases inolin" 9: inmates were modified to reclusion perpetua, 1& cases inolin" 11 inmates were modified to indeterminate penalty, 11 cases inolin" 11 inmates were remanded to lower court for retrial and 1 cases inolin" 0 inmates were acCuitted by the 4#.. n a study prepared by the -ree %e"al Assistance roup -%A, it pointed out that the result of the reiew of cases done by the 4upreme #ourt )point all too clearly to the imperfections, wea!nesses and problems of the Philippine 6ustice system). 4ome decisions of the trial courts were oerturned for imposin" death penalty on offenses which were not sub6ect to death penalty. 0: conicts in 1998, 1&: or 0>[email protected] were a"ricultural wor!ers, 1& were construction wor!ers, 7 were transport wor!ers, and >0 were in wor!ers in sales and serices. @ finished arious leels of hi"h school while the remainin" did not "o to school or hae finished only elementary or ocational education. t is perhaps important to point out that out of these > crimes punishable by death, the death penalty has been applied to only 17 crimes. +o one has been conicted of Cualified bribery, Cualified piracy and plunder. nterestin"ly also, no public official has been sentenced to death for crimes inolin" public officials. That the death penalty is not a deterrent to crime has already been demonstrated. That there are seere imperfections in the 6ustice system which could li!ely result in a situation where innocent ictim mi"ht be executed can be seen in the reiew of cases by the 4upreme #ourt. That it is biased a"ainst the poor and the mar"inali'ed can be seen in the socio2economic profile of the conicts. t is iolation of the ri"ht to life and the ri"ht not to be treated cruelly. =et, the "oernment maintains that it is effectie in combattin" crime. Dnder the death penalty law, > crimes are considered heinous and are now sub6ect to the death penalty. t imposes the mandatory death penalty on 01 crimes while the other 0: crimes are death eli"ible. These are crimes for which a ran"e of penalties includin" the death penalty is imposed. 4ome #on"ressmen and 4enators are proposin" other lists of crimes to add to the aboe. 4ome een contemplated lowerin" the a"e of those punishable by the death penalty to include youthful offenders. The death penalty is an easy way out for a "oernment in the face of a stron" outcry from the citi'enry who wanted the "oernment to stop criminality. t is bein" used to create the illusion that the "oernment is doin" somethin" to stop the crimes when in fact it is not. 4ad thou"h it maybe, more lies would be lost unless the death penalty in the Philippines is repealed
ABOLITION OF DATH PNALT! ;-+T<+ Accordin" to /epublic Act +o. 7:9, death penalty is a penalty for crimes that are )heinous for bein" "rieous, odious and hateful offenses and which, by reason of their inherent or manifest wic!edness, iciousness, atrocity and perersity are repu"nant and outra"eous to the common standards and norms of decency and morality in a 6ust, ciili'ed and ordered society.) eath penalty is a cruel, futile and dan"erous punishment for )ery serious reasons and with due 6udicial process.) Accordin" to Amnesty nternational, a worldwide moement of people wor!in" for internationally reco"ni'ed human ri"hts? death penalty is the ultimate, irreersible denial of human ri"hts. Thus, they wor!ed towards abolishin" it in order to )end the cycle of iolence created by a system riddled with economic and racial bias and tainted with human error.) BA#E/ different offences. 4uch of those are murder, rape, parricide, infanticide and Cualified bribery, amon" others. ;xecutions resumed in 1999 until year 0&&& when former President ;strada announced a moratorium on executions. This has been continued by current President Arroyo, in practice, throu"hout her presidency. +ow, under her rule, the death penalty is a"ain abolished . 4TA+#; am in faor of abolishin" the death penalty law in the Philippines. Allow me to present my ar"uments. -irst, it iolates the ri"ht to lie. 4econd, it is a ery cruel practice. Third, it is anti2poor. %ast, death penalty defeats its purpose. A/D$;+T4 -irst, the imposition of death penalty iolates a person5s ri"ht to lie. Article 4ection 1 of the 1987 #onstitution, otherwise !nown as the Bill of /i"hts, states that )+o person shall be depried of life, liberty, or propertyF) By imposin" death penalty, the ri"ht of a criminal to lie is bein" iolated. -urthermore, it is a !nown fact that ma6ority of -ilipinos are #atholics. As said, we hae one of the world5s lar"est #hristian populations. Accordin" to the Ten #ommandments of the #hurch, thou shall not !ill. Therefore, nobody is "ien the ri"ht to commit the lies of others. (hether that person is a criminal or not, nobody has the ri"ht to
play od and ta!e the life that 3e has "ien. -ilipinos should )respect and alue the sanctity of human life and uphold the irtue and reli"ious doctrines that are expected of us as a dominant #hristian nation.) 4econd, it is a ery cruel, inhuman and irreersible practice. t is ery cruel and in human because persons are !illed. This alone is proof.
crime rates in the country. f death penalty is effectie, there should hae been less crimes but it is Cuite the contrary. Also, there are no concrete eidence li!e studies or tests that could proe that the imposition of death penalty really preents crime thus maintainin" peace and order in the country. 4D$$A/= To cap off this essay, death penalty is the punishment sered to those who hae committed crimes that are )heinous for bein" "rieous, odious and hateful offenses and which, by reason of their inherent or manifest wic!edness, iciousness, atrocity and perersity are repu"nant and outra"eous to the common standards and norms of decency and morality in a 6ust, ciili'ed and ordered society.) am in faor of the abolition of death penalty because first, its imposition iolates the ri"ht to lie. 4econd, it is a ery cruel, inhuman and irreersible act. Third, death penalty is anti2 poor. %astly, death penalty does not sere its purpose of preentin" crimes and preserin" peace and order.