The Death Penalty in the Philippines

Introduction

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 This is the common issue debated by the
senators of the Philippines or even around the world. Death penalty aims to
execute person who are committed to as a suspect of killing and rape which is
against human rights but this penalties as well is against human rights. All of the
families of raped victims and the victims of injustice killings are for sure in favor of
this kind of penalty. But how about the family of the accused suspect of such
crime, maybe the accused suspect is being accused of a crimes which he did not
do. Death penalty in the Philippines is stated on the Republic Act No. 7659 which
is an act to impose the death penalty for certain heinous crimes, amending for
that purpose the revised penal laws, as amended, other special penal laws, and
for other purposes. The death penalty can be traced back during the Pre-Spanish
time where Filipinos although infrequent, is already practicing it. The Spanish
also imposed it on locals who rebelled against them and it was retained during
the American period. The Martial Law in 1965-1986, even though it was
abolished during Cory A quino’s term, it was re -imposed when Ramos stepped
into the presidency. It was also present in Estrada and Arroyo’s term.

“An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth” is how the saying goes. Coined by
the infamous Hammurabi’s Code around 1700 BC, this ancient expression has
become the basis of a great political debate over the past several decades – the
death penalty. While the conflict can be whittled down to a matter of morals, a
more pragmatic approach shows defendable points that are far more evidence
backed. Supporters of the death penalty advocate that it deters crime, provides
closure, and is a just punishment for those who choose to take a human life.
Those against the death penalty argue that execution is a betrayal of basic
human rights, an ineffective crime deterrent, an economically wasteful option,
and an outdated method.
Counter Argument

Death penalty shows justice. There will be justice when we punish the
guilty. It shows quality, on T.V I have seen people being interviewed because
one or some of their relatives died. There are crying for help and wanting justice
for the death of their loved ones. I know for sure that justice can only be the
solution for them to be relieved. A serious crime must have serious penalty and
that is death. Justice can dignify a person According to Bedau H (1982), Most
people have a natural fear of death- it’s a trait man have to think about what will
happen before we act, if we don’t think it consciously, we will think about it
unconsciously. Think, if every murdered who killed someone died instantly; the
homicide rate would be very low because no one likes to die. We cannot do this,
but if the justice system can make it more swift and severe, we could change the
laws to make capital punishment faster and make an appeal a shorter process.
The death penalty is important because it could save the lives of thousands of
potential victims who are at stake. Conclusion Death penalty is one of the
debatable in the criminal justice system. Today, there are many pros and cons to
this death penalty issues. However, if people weight the argument properly, and
have empathy for the victims, they will be more inclined to favor capital
punishment. As a matter of fact, most people in the Philippines today are in favor
of it. But we need more states to enforce the death penalty.

A recent Social Weather Stations (SWS) survey found that if there are
other alternatives, less people agree with reinstating the death penalty for those
who commit serious crimes related to illegal drugs.

Results of the March 2018 SWS survey released on Wednesday, October 10,
showed that less than 40% of Filipinos believe that the death penalty should be
the punishment for people convicted of 7 crimes related to illegal drugs.

Out of all the crimes linked to illegal drugs, at least 47% agree that the death
penalty should be the sanction for those who commit rape under the influence.
The other 6 crimes, meanwhile, showed a demand for the capital punishment at
only 22% to 33%. The survey found that the demand for life imprisonment for the
7 crimes hit more than 50%, with the highest at 78% for those convicted of
working in drug dens. Among those who disagree with the death penalty, at least
42% cite religious reasons for opposing it, 21% think it is possible that a criminal
would reform, 14% believe there are alternatives to death, 10% cite the
questionable justice system, 7% cite humane reasons, and 3% question the
policy itself.

Ernest van den Haag, a Professor of Jurisprudence at Fordham University

who has studied the question of deterrence closely, wrote: "Even though
statistical demonstrations are not conclusive, and perhaps cannot be, capital
punishment is likely to deter more than other punishments because people fear
death more than anything else. They fear most death deliberately inflicted by law
and scheduled by the courts. Whatever people fear most is likely to deter most.
Hence, the threat of the death penalty may deter some murderers who otherwise
might not have been deterred. And surely the death penalty is the only penalty
that could deter prisoners already serving a life sentence and tempted to kill a
guard, or offenders about to be arrested and facing a life sentence. Perhaps they
will not be deterred. But they would certainly not be deterred by anything else.
We owe all the protection we can give to law enforcers exposed to special risks."

Finally, the death penalty certainly "deters" the murderer who is executed. Strictly
speaking, this is a form of incapacitation, similar to the way a robber put in prison
is prevented from robbing on the streets. Vicious murderers must be killed to
prevent them from murdering again, either in prison, or in society if they should
get out. Both as a deterrent and as a form of permanent incapacitation, the death
penalty helps to prevent future crime.
Our Argument

The death penalty is not a deterrent because most people who commit
murders either do not expect to be caught or do not carefully weigh the
differences between a possible execution and life in prison before they act.
Frequently, murders are committed in moments of passion or anger, or by
criminals who are substance abusers and acted impulsively. There is no
conclusive proof that the death penalty acts as a better deterrent than the threat
of life imprisonment. A 2012 report released by the prestigious National
Research Council of the National Academies and based on a review of more
than three decades of research, concluded that studies claiming a deterrent
effect on murder rates from the death penalty are fundamentally flawed. A survey
of the former and present presidents of the country's top academic criminological
societies found that 84% of these experts rejected the notion that research had
demonstrated any deterrent effect from the death penalty .

Death penalty is impractical in the Philippines because our state has a flawed
judicial system, it opposes to the culture of the majority and it is simply not
compatible with our unfortunate kind of economy thus it is not a proven
deterrence to crime. It is not practical in the Philippines because we have a
flawed judicial system. According to an essay about the practicality of death
penalty by Valderrama, it was stated there that, “For the death penalty to be
practical and efficient, a fair criminal justice system is essential. However, the
criminal justice system in our country is full of defects such as faulty police work,
coerced confessions, inept defense counsel, perjured testimony and trial court
decisions based on seemingly inconclusive evidence. In addition, the Supreme
Court, in a 2004 decision, made 72% judicial errors. How can death penalty be a
practical one when the judiciary of the country is inefficient and full of
incompetence?” “We have to address the long pestering issue of impunity. Poor
law enforcement results in breakdown of law and order.”

The death penalty is not practical in the Philippines because it opposes to the
culture of the majority of the Filipinos. For we believe in the value of life. In a
sense, people want death penalty because we don’t want killings to happen yet
we impose killing for killing. We may say that death penalty should only be for
heinous crimes but at the end of the day, yes, we know which crime requires
severe punishment but do we know enough to decide which life to take and when
we take it?

In connection to that, it is simply not compatible with our economy because

according to the PSA, poverty incidence among Filipinos is rising to 25.8% in the
first half of 2014, from 24.6% in 2013. By this and by how we see our country, we
can really say that poverty is everywhere. The death penalty is very impractical
for the Philippines for people would, again and again, do anything by any means
necessary just to feed their families even though that would mean dirty works
and punishment. Emotions overpower judgment in times of desperation. “In a
2004 survey, of 1,121 death row inmates in the Philippines, it was found that
majority of the inmates knew of the death penalty before they committed their
offenses. Clearly, death penalty has little deterrence to none.” In that way, we
are saving ourselves from the condemnation of taking a human life and at the
same time doing something that could practically help our economy.

Death penalty has four necessities: First, It constitutes cruel and unusual
punishment. In a 2006 execution, Angel Nieves Diaz, was killed using a so-
called “humane” lethal injection, but it took 34 minutes and 2 doses before she
died. Other methods that are used for death penalties which were learned from
the interrogation methods used by the CIA on terrorism suspects which includes:
rectal infusion —, gun drill —, water boarding, chaining, and nudity. Death
penalty also violates the most basic of all human rights, which is the right to live.
It also violates the right the people should not be subjected to torture or cruel,
inhumane punishments. Second, The risk of executing innocent people.
Death penalty is irreversible and these may lead to people paying for the crimes
they did not even commit. This kind of things really happen even how really
developed a country and its justice system is because it is always susceptible to
human failure. Also, unlike prison sentences, death penalty is irreparable. One
case was of Cameron Todd Willingham, which was found innocent after his
execution in 2004. And other people who were wrongly convicted of a crime, they
are suffering for years or decades, thinking what will happen to them which is like
mental torture. There are also cases in which death penalty is often used in a
disproportional manner against the poor, minorities and members of racial, ethnic
and political and religious groups. Third, Death denies opportunity of
rehabilitation. Many people believe that people who are sentenced of death
penalty should get second chances, because for them, people who are in death
rows never got any first chances. And also for them what makes a criminal is
poverty, racism, neglect, violence that came from society or from parents, and
mental illnesses, which can be treated and lessen the effects on them or can
change them to become a better individual through rehabilitation. One case was
of Stan Tookie Williams, a former leader of the notorious Crips gang in Los
Angeles. While in bars he reflected in life and wrote a series of anti-gang books
for the youth. For years, Stan has been talking to students via telephone urging
them to stay away from the gang life. He captivated the youth, his message
resonated, and his books were very effective, but instead of recognizing what he
has done behind bars and how he changed, he was still executed in 2005.Lastly,
There is no evidence that it will reduce crime rates. There is actually no
evidence that implementing death penalty will reduce the crime rates. Yes,
people might fear the said punishment but this does not apply to all. The
implementation of death penalty, especially on those innocent people might
actually be the reason why people would protest against the government or
worse, would be criminals themselves in seek of vengeance. According to the
NC Coalition for Alternatives to Death Penalty, the murder rate for the state of
North Carolina actually declined following a halt in utilizing execution as a form of
punishment. The coalition also points out that, “…most people on death row
committed their crimes in the heat of passion, while under the influence of drugs
or alcohol, or while suffering from mental illness. They represent a group that is
highly unlikely to make rational decisions based on a fear of future consequences
for their actions.”
CONCLUSION

Death penalty is one of the debatable in the criminal justice system.

Today, there are many pros and cons to this death penalty issues. However, if
people weight the argument properly, and have empathy for the victims, they will
be more inclined to favor capital punishment. As a matter of fact, most people in
the Philippines today are in favor of it. But we need more states to enforce the
death penalty.

We conclude that death penalty’s disadvantages ultimately outweigh its

advantages. Thus, death penalty is impractical, not beneficial and unnecessary.

For as the famous Mahatma Gandhi would say, “an eye for an eye will only make
the whole world blind.”