Diossalyn E.

Tuico BSA 1-1

The Return of Death Penalty

Capital punishment was first abolished in our government in 1987, making the Philippines
the first in Asia to end the reign of death penalty (Pantajo-Kapunan, 2019). Nevertheless, in less
than a year, with the new constitution after the regime of the president-turned-dictator
Ferdinand Marcos, a bill was submitted to the Congress stating the restoration of the death
penalty. When Gen. Fidel V. Ramos was elected president in 1992, death penalty was then signed
into a law in the name of Republic Act 7659 in order to maneuver the rising crime rate.(Cepeda,
2017)

Fourteen years after the restoration of capital punishment, on the 4 th of June 2006, then-
President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo signed a law prohibiting the imposition of such
punishment(Gavilan, 2017) Which results on commuting all crimes punishable by death penalty
to reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment (Pantajo-Kapunan 2019). During 2016 Mayor Rodrigo
Duterte was elected as president, rising in fame with his presidential campaign of war on drugs
and promising the restoration of death penalty for heinous crimes(De Lima, 2019). In the same
year, the bill seeking to reinstate the capital punishment was submitted to the House of
Representatives. Later in 2017 it was briskly passed from the House to the Senate where the
death penalty bill was dropped.(Pantajo-Kapunan 2019)

Death penalty served as a punishment for severe or heinous crimes while also
discouraging or preventing others from doing the same horrible acts(Nygaard, 2014). The heinous
crimes which invokes the restoration of capital punishment involves terrorist bombings, drug
trafficking, rape, murders, gun for hire, kidnapping for ransom, extra judicial killings, smuggling
and plunder(Pantajo-Kapunan, 2019). Death penalty's use has been justified on the grounds that
it is a strong deterrent to crime (Cram, 2016). Inspite of that, it is a fact that different people have
different perpectives and opinions which often stem back to morality, cost and personal
judgment (Legality and Use of Death Penalty, 2015). Most of these opinions boil down to one
decision: "Should the death penalty be legalized again or remain outlawed?"
 Many argue that without this type of punishment, criminals who committed brutal crimes
will not have their fair and well-deserved punishment (Death Row and Death Penalty, 2015). Fred
Castro, a lawyer, a deputy speaker and an ex-officio member of the House Committee on Justice
said that “criminals are having a field day” due to the absence of capital punishment. He also
quoted St. Aquinas’ Summa Theologica, “[I]f a man be dangerous and infectious to the
community, on account of some sin, it is praiseworthy and advantageous that he be killed in
order to safeguard the common good.” This is to show that even a saint or a theologian
supported his claims of killing the criminals if it is needed for the sake of the whole community
(Torres, 2017).

Even without taking into consideration the teachings of the Catholic or Christian church
it is but right not to legalize the capital punishment. After the restoration of death penalty at the
administration of Pres. Fidel V. Ramos, by the year 1994, the number of persons in deathrow was
12, and as of December 1999 it increased to 936 death convicts in National Bilibid Prison and 23
detained at the Correctional Institute for Women. Of these figures six are minors and twelve are
foreigners as compiled by the Episcopal Commission on Prisoner Welfare of the Catholic Bishops
Conference of the Philippines. It indicates that the imposition of death penalty is not a great
deterrent to criminality (Pantajo-Kapunan, 2019). Another local study was conducted, which
revealed that 1121 death row inmates knew about the capital punishment before they
committed their heinous offenses (FLAG, 2004). It was also revealed that by the administration
of Estrada, despite 7 death penalty executions, crime rate further increased by 15.3% (De Lima
2019).

In our flawed justice system, the poor are the usual victims. Equal Justice Initiative
founder Bryan Stevenson said that, “Our justice system treats you better if you are rich and guilty
than if you are poor and innocent.” These can be observed in the current situation of the
Philippines, whereas our social and material inequality are increasing. For instance, based on the
study conducted by Free Legal Assistance Group(FLAG) in 2004, it is discovered that a total of 890
death row convicts are poor, uneducated, and unemployed. Within 1993 to 2004, the Supreme
Court shockingly revealed 71.77% judicial error, covering 651 out of 907 death penalty cases. As
the legal justice system’s role is to keep our hopes up, it leads our faith to the ground because of
the uneven administering of justice (De Lima, 2019).

Personally, I disagree that death penalty should be legalized, it must remain outlawed. Its
cons far outweigh its pros. Up until now there is no empirical evidence that will show that death
penalty is a greater deterrent to criminality than reclusion perpetua. The focus of our criminal
justice system must be punishing the true offenders while addressing well-deserved punishment
without social injustices. Death is never a true justice, it is irreversible, once life was taken away
it can never be brought back again, even after pieces of evidences surfaced. It is never the cure
to the poison, it is the poison itself. With our flawed and decaying justice system death penalty
will be just another rotten ingredient that will intensify its decomposition. It is written on
Zechariah 7:9, “This is what the Lord Almighty said: ‘Administer true justice; show mercy and
compassion to one another.’”