Dear mindful readers,
I was going through my research papers back when I was completing my Masteral degree in Public Administration at the National College of Public Administration and Governance at the University of the Philippines in Diliman, Quezon City, “jurassic” years ago. I chanced upon my paper about the “death penalty” in the Philippines which revived a myriad of memories of seemingly unending moments of waiting along hallways, while perched on all kinds of sofas, to finally complete my interviews with advocates from both sides of the subject. In the ongoing discourse surrounding criminal justice in the Philippines, the issue of the death penalty has emerged as contentious as the alleged “kidnapping” of a former Philippine President who was whisked off to foreign soil to face trial. Advocates for the capital punishment continue their endless debates strongly on the argument that it is a necessary deterrent to heinous crimes, that it is “justice” served for victims, and ultimately a reinforcement of the rule of law.
In a third world country where one cannot and should not lead by being all “goody two shoes”, a primary justification for the death penalty is its potential deterrent effect on would-be criminals. Research papers in criminology and psychology suggest that the certainty of severe punishment can discourage individuals, rather, potential crooks from engaging in violent or premeditated acts. Now that localities are becoming increasingly alarmed with drug-related violence, sexual assault, and other gruesome crimes, reinstating the death penalty is said to serve as a powerful message that perpetrators of these crimes will face the ultimate consequence for their actions.
Instances of brutal crimes such as the rape, mutilation and murder of innocent children or the indiscriminate killing in communities, shatter the very fabric of every institution and leave lasting scars on families. These heinous acts scream for a response that evokes a sense of justice and security for the citizenry.
The emotional and psychological toll on the victims’ families can be utterly unforgiving and unimaginable. That gnawing feeling of injustice and the urge to seek revenge can be overwhelming.
To give you a brief overview of the history of the “death penalty” in the Philippines, allow me to just lift the significant points which may help in understanding the entire context of this writing;
The 1987 Constitution of the Philippines prohibits the use of the death penalty by stating ‘the death penalty shall not be imposed unless for compelling reasons involving heinous crimes, the Congress hereafter provides for it. Any death penalty already imposed shall be reduced to reclusion perpetua’. [1]
In December 1993, the administration of the late former President Fidel Ramos re-imposed the death penalty under Republic Act (RA) 7659 adopted by Congress. The law listed a total of 46 crimes punishable by death. Over the years, a number of new RAs and amendments to existing ones (8177, 8353 and 9165) further defined those acts punishable by death resulting in 52 capital offenses, 30 of which were death-mandatory and 22 death-eligible.
- In 1999, former President Joseph Estrada had seven death-row convicts executed through lethal injection (RA 8177) which was reportedly intended to abate rising criminality. Following strong lobbying by the Catholic Church and human rights groups, President Estrada issued a temporary moratorium in March 2000.
- In December 2003, then President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo announced the lifting of the de-facto moratorium on executions in response to a reported rise in drug trafficking and kidnapping. Executions were expected to resume in January 2004 when the Supreme Court vacated the decision of the lower court to put to death two death-row inmates following testimonial evidence that exonerated them of their crimes.[2]
- In April 2006, former President Arroyo commuted the sentences of 1,230 death row candidates and ultimately signed RA 9346 in June 2006 which abolished the use of capital punishment[3]. Congress overwhelmingly supported the abolition of the practice in their vote for the RA earlier that month, replacing the death penalty with life imprisonment and reclusion perpetua.
- RA 9346 or the Anti-Death Penalty Law,” states, inter alia, ‘The imposition of the penalty of death is hereby prohibited. Accordingly, Republic Act No. Eight Thousand One Hundred Seventy-Seven (R.A. No. 8177), otherwise known as the Act Designating Death by Lethal Injection is hereby repealed, Republic Act No. Seven Thousand Six Hundred Fifty-Nine (R.A. No. 7659), otherwise known as the Death Penalty Law, and all other laws, executive orders and decrees, insofar as they impose the death penalty are hereby repealed or amended accordingly.
For certain sectors, especially the families of the victims of heinous crimes, the imposition of death penalty provides a sense of resolution and closure for them who have endured the excruciating pain and have suffered from the loss of their loved ones in brutal circumstances. The principle of “an eye for an eye” resonates deeply with many Filipinos who seek justice and accountability in a system that they felt have failed to deliver adequate repercussions for actions of sadistic offenders.
Critics of the death penalty often raise concerns of its potential for misuse or wrongful convictions. Thus we emphasize that any implementation of the death penalty must be accompanied by rigorous legal safeguards to prevent miscarriages of justice. These safeguards could include thorough evidence standards, the right to a robust defense, and a transparent review process for death penalty cases. Due process must be ensured, leaving no stone unturned to ascertain that the scale of justice does not tip towards biases or errors.
The never-ending arguments about the capital punishment of death penalty in the Philippines is complex and multifaceted. That said, in advocating for the death penalty, we must strive for a system that prioritizes fairness, accountability, and the unwavering commitment to protect the sanctity of life within our communities.
Perhaps time will come when the nation shall learn to confront the realities that indeed there lurks such grim and gnarly shadows in the dark, salivating and eager to pounce on an unsuspecting victim, leaving the poor soul devoid of his humanity, self-worth, and ultimately, his life.
Be safe always dear mindful readers and be blessed!
Love and light,
Iamempress22
Information sources:
[1] Article III, Section 19 (1) 1987 Philippine Constitution
[2] http://www.chr.gov.ph/MAIN%20PAGES/about%20hr/advisories/pdf_files/abolishing%20death%20penalty.pdf
[3] RA 9346, Section 1
