SUBJECT OF DEATH PENALTY

The Congress of the Philippines is now in boiling water whether they shall revive the
death penalty for heinous crimes. This was after the sudden increase in extra-judicial killings
reported by local, national and international media right after the election of President Rodrigo
Roa Duterte. It can be remembered that it was even the Presidents promise to execute all who
manufacture, buy, sell, possess and use illegal drugs. For President Duterte, addressing the illegal
drug issue in the country would certainly reduce the crime rates. As a means to address the issue,
it has been the word of mouth of the President to kill them all. The rise of the number of victims
of killing who were tagged as drug pusher or user can therefore be reasonably linked to his
promise to end their lives.
According to Article 3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), everyone
has the right to life, liberty and security of person. Likewise, Article 6 of the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) provides that every human being has the
inherent right to life. This right shall be protected by law and no one shall be arbitrarily deprived
of his life. Moreover, Item 11 of the General Principles of ASEAN Declaration of Human Rights
(ADHR) states that every person has an inherent right to life which shall be protected by law. No
person shall be deprived of life save in accordance with law.
Meanwhile, with the great effort of the administration to revive the death penalty, the
Congress, which is composed of Senate and House of Representatives, has differing views as to
what crimes to include in the revival of death penalty. Although the Philippine criminal law
punishes with death penalty some heinous crimes like murder, rape with homicide, robbery with
homicide, plunder, direct bribery, destructive arson, et cetera, the move to revive death penalty
seems to specifically apply only to drug related crimes. Should that happen, it will not affect the
prohibition to impose death penalty as regards the other crimes, if at all, it will only be an
exception to the rule that death penalty is prohibited but no to this would be law.
In contrary, according to Amnesty International, at least 1,634 people were executed in 25
countries in 2015. This represents a stark increase on the number of executions recorded, 2014 of
more than 50%; in 2014 Amnesty International recorded 1,061 executions in 22 countries
worldwide.

Page 1 of 5
 This is the highest number of executions recorded in more than 25 years (since 1989).
Most executions took place in China, Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and the USA in that order.
China remained the worlds top executioner but the true extent of the use of the death penalty
in China is unknown as this data is considered a state secret; the figure of 1,634 excludes the
thousands of executions believed to have been carried out in China. Excluding China,
almost 90% of all executions took place in just three countries Iran, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.
During 2015, 25 countries, about one in 10 of all countries worldwide, are known to have
carried out executions a rise from 22 in 2014. This number has decreased significantly from
two decades ago (39 countries carried out executions in 1996). 140 countries worldwide, more
than two-thirds, are abolitionist in law or practice.
In 2015, four countries Fiji, Madagascar, the Republic of Congo and Suriname
abolished the death penalty for all crimes. In total, 102 countries have done so a majority of the
worlds states. In 2015, Mongolia also passed a new criminal code abolishing the death penalty
which will come into effect later in 2016.
Commutations or pardons of death sentences were recorded in 34 countries in 2015. At
least 71 people who had been sentenced to death were exonerated in six countries in 2015: China
(1), Egypt (1), Nigeria (41), Pakistan (at least 21), Taiwan (1) and USA (6).
At least 1,998 death sentences were recorded in 61 countries in 2015, a decline from
2014 (at least 2,466 death sentences in 55 countries). At least 20,292 people were on death row at
the end of 2015.
The following methods of execution were used across the world: beheading, hanging,
lethal injection and shooting. Reports indicated that at least nine people who were under 18 at the
time of the crime for which they were sentenced to death were executed in 2015 four in Iran
and five in Pakistan. In many countries where people were sentenced to death or executed, the
proceedings did not meet international fair trial standards. In some cases this included
the extraction of confessions through torture or other ill-treatment, including in Bahrain, China,
Iran, Iraq, North Korea and Saudi Arabia.
People continued to be sentenced to death and executed for offences that do not meet the
most serious crimes threshold of intentional killing as set out in international law and
standards. These offences included drug-related crimes in at least 12 countries in Asia and the
Middle East, as well as committing adultery (Maldives, Saudi Arabia), economic crimes

Page 2 of 5
(China, North Korea, Viet Nam), apostasy (Saudi Arabia) and insulting the prophet of Islam
(Iran).
Should death penalty be imposed, the question is what crimes then should be included in
this proposed law? The 1987 Constitution states that neither shall the death penalty be imposed,
unless, for compelling reasons involving heinous crimes, the Congress hereafter provides for it
One of the answers could be to punish only heinous crimes. But what are heinous crimes?

Republic Act (R.A.) No. 7659 enumerates heinous crimes. Under that law, the following
are punishable by reclusion perpetua or imprisonment of 20 years and 1 day to 40 years.

1. piracy in general
2. mutiny on the high seas
3. and simple rape

The following are punishable by reclusion perpetua to death:

1. qualified piracy;
2. qualified bribery under certain circumstances;
3. parricide;
4. murder;
5. infanticide, except when committed by the mother of the child for the purpose of
concealing her dishonor or either of the maternal grandparents for the same
purpose;
6. kidnapping and serious illegal detention under certain circumstances;
7. robbery with violence against or intimidation of persons under certain
circumstances;
8. destructive arson, except when death results as a consequence of the commission
of any of the acts penalized under the article;
9. attempted or frustrated rape, when a homicide is committed by reason or on
occasion thereof; plunder; and
10. carnapping, when the driver or occupant of the carnapped motor vehicle is killed
or raped in the course of the commission of the carnapping or on the occasion
thereof.

While the following are punishable by penalty of death:

Page 3 of 5
 1. In qualified bribery, when it is the public officer who asks or demands the gift or
present.
2. In kidnapping and serious illegal detention: (i) when the kidnapping or detention
was committed for the purpose of extorting ransom from the victim or any other
person; (ii) when the victim is killed or dies as a consequence of the detention;
(iii) when the victim is raped, subjected to torture or dehumanizing acts.
3. In destructive arson, when as a consequence of the commission of any of the acts
penalized under Article 320, death results.
4. In rape: (i) when by reason or on occasion of the rape, the victim becomes insane
or homicide is committed; (ii) when committed with any of the following
attendant circumstances: (1) when the victim is under eighteen (18) years of age
and the offender is a parent, ascendant, step-parent, guardian, relative by
consanguinity or affinity within the third civil degree, or the common-law-spouse
of the parent of the victim; (2) when the victim is under the custody of the police
or military authorities; (3) when the rape is committed in full view of the husband,
parent, any of the children or other relatives within the third degree of
consanguinity; (4) when the victim is a religious or a child below seven years old;
(5) when the offender knows that he is afflicted with Acquired Immune
Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) disease; (6) when committed by any member of the
Armed Forces of the Philippines or the Philippine National Police or any law
enforcement agency; and (7) when by reason or on the occasion of the rape, the
victim has suffered permanent physical mutilation.

But with the subsequent enactment of Republic Act No. (RA) 9346 or An Act Prohibiting
the Imposition of Death Penalty in the Philippines, the imposition of death penalty is now
prohibited. It provides that in lieu of the death penalty, the penalty of reclusion perpetua shall be
imposed when the law violated makes use of the nomenclature of the penalties of the RPC.

When the international conventions like UDHR, ICCPR, ADHR, as well as the 1987
Constitution, speak of right to life, they also speak of right not to be deprived thereof but by law.
The conventions and the Constitution contemplate not an absolute right to life but a relative one

Page 4 of 5
which may be justly deprived by the state as may be provided by law. As provided therein, death
penalty may be imposed for compelling reasons involving heinous crimes.

As provided in R.A. 7659 and in People vs. Macabando, 2013, the Supreme Court of the
Philippines, through Justice Brion characterized what heinous crimes as grievous, odious and
hateful offenses and which, by reason of their inherent or manifest wickedness, viciousness,
atrocity and perversity are repugnant and outrageous to the common standards and norms of
decency and morality in a just, civilized and ordered society.

I believe that when the crime of rape is committed with qualifying circumstances of
tender age of the victim, or when the offended party is a senior citizen, the crime is heinous that
warrants capital punishment. Whenever the killing is murder, it being inherently and manifestly
wicked shall likewise be punished by death. Direct bribery is also a hateful offense, victimizing
the public in general and abuse of public trust not inadvertently but willfully. Kidnapping and
serious illegal detention, as well as destructive arson shall likewise be punished by death for
being odious. However, I believe that mere use or possession of illegal drugs shall not be
sentenced to death, the punishment not being proportionate to the gravity of offense. They may
be punished by life imprisonment. But, maintenance of drug dens, illegal drug trade and drug
pushing shall be punished by death. Such crimes are seriously detrimental to the public
considering its multiplicative negative effect to the society and the innocent ones.

Page 5 of 5