Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Abstract: The death penalty is the punishment of execution, administered to someone legally convicted of a capital
crime. It has been one of the most debated political issues in the Philippines. A recurring and pressing question is
that; how to best measure the effectiveness of the death penalty and its impact on society? Obviously, if the goal is
to put a person to death then the death penalty, once carried out, is quite effective. However, one would reasonably
assume that punishing criminals will have other benefits and even drawbacks. For example, capital punishment may
serve as an effective deterrence to future acts of violence or decrease the cost of punishing criminals. Another issue
which arises in this debate is the criteria used to select candidates for the death penalty. This clearly raises the issue
of equity in administration. Finally, one cannot negate the fact that once administered the death penalty cannot be
revoked. Corrective actions cannot be taken when and if information surfaces which exonerates an individual of a
crime.
Key words: Death Penalty, punishment, execution
1. BACKGROUND
Capital punishment in the Philippines has a varied history and is currently
suspended as of 2006. Capital punishment was legal after independence and
increased in use under the Ferdinand Marcos regime. After the fall of Marcos,
there was a moratorium on capital punishment from 1987 to 1999, followed
by a resumption in executions from 1999 to 2006, and followed - in turn - by
a law ending the practice.
Filipinos have mixed opinions about the death penalty, with many opposing it
on religious and humanitarian grounds, while advocates see it as a way of
deterring crimes.
In the Philippines, the earliest record of death penalty was during the
Spanish Era. The Spanish colonizers brought with them Medieval Europes
penal system including executions. The earliest forms of death penalty
included burning, decapitation, drowning, flaying, garrote, hanging, shooting,
stabbing and others. Some of our heroes, including our national hero, Jose
Rizal, have been victims of death penalty. During the American Period, death
penalty is still widely used. Public executions are still held though some laws
have been passed to minimize the field of death penalty. Some of the capital
crimes punishable by death were Treason, parricide, piracy, kidnapping,
murder, rape, and robbery with homicide.
Death penalty was primarily used against the Nationalist Filipinos who
build resistance against the American Colonizers. During the Japanese
Occupation, no record of death penalties was made simply because
extrajudicial executions were widely practiced as part of the pacification of the
country.
The Philippines was the first country in Asia to abolish death penalty in
all crimes. It was then replaced by reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment.
This was during the reign of President Corazon Aquino although shortly after
her six-year term, Fidel V. Ramos, the proceeding president was forced to
De La Salle University, Manila, Philippines
November 28, 2017
reinstate death penalty as punishment for capital crimes due to heinous crimes
committed in his time. It is also in this time that Republic Act No. 8177 was
passed and so it states that death penalty shall be carried out through lethal
injection. In the time of President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, she stated that
she is not in favor of executions but then due to the rise in crimes related to
drugs and kidnappings that targeted the Filipino-Chinese community, she
announced that she would resume executions to sow fear into the hearts of
criminals. Although, on 15 April 2006, the sentences of 1,230 death row
inmates were commuted to life imprisonment, in what Amnesty International
believes to be the "largest ever commutation of death sentences". Capital
punishment was again suspended via Republic Act No. 9346, which was signed
by President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo on 24 June 2006. The bill followed a
vote held in Congress earlier that month which overwhelmingly supported the
abolition of the practice. The penalties of life imprisonment and reclusion
perpetua (detention of indefinite length, usually for at least 30-years) replaced
the death penalty. Critics of Arroyo's initiative called it a political move meant
to placate the Roman Catholic Church, some sectors of which were
increasingly vocal in their opposition to her rule.
2. ARGUMENTS
De La Salle University, Manila, Philippines
November 28, 2017
Against the Death Penalty:
a) Death Penalty Fails to Rehabilitate
What would it accomplish to put someone on death row? The victim is
already dead-you cannot bring him back. When the opponents feel fear of
death will prevent one from committing murder, it is not true because most
murders are done on the heat of passion when a person cannot think rationally.
b) Death Penalty Failed as a Deterrent
Some criminologist claim they have statistically proven that when an
execution is publicized, more murders occur in the day and weeks that follow. A
good example is in the Linberg kidnapping. A number of states adopted the
death penalty for crime like this, but figures showed kidnapping
increased. Publicity may encourage crime instead of preventing it (McClellan,
G., 1961).
c) Does not Discourage Crime
It is noted that we need extreme penalty as a deterrent to crime. This
could be a strong argument if it could be proved that the death penalty
discourages murderers and kidnappers. There is strong evidence that the death
penalty does not discourage crime at all (McClellan, G., 1961).
d) Conviction of the Innocent Occurs
The states that have the death penalty should be free of murder,
but those states have the most murders, and the states that abolished the death
penalty has less. Conviction of the innocent does occur and death makes a
miscarriage of justice irrevocable. Two states Maine and Rhode Island abolished
the death penalty because of public shame and remorse after they discovered
they executed some innocent men.
e) Fear of Death Does not Reduce Crime.
The fear of the death penalty has never reduced crime. Through
most of history executions were public and brutal. Some criminals were
even crushed to death slowly under heavy weight. Crime was more
common at that time than it is now. Evidence shows execution does not
act as a deterrent to capital punishment.
For the Death Penalty:
a) Threat of Death Penalty Rate of Homicide Decreases
Frank Carrington (1978) states that if is there any way one can
tell whether the death penalty deters murders from killing? There is no
way one can tell whether the death penalty deters murderers from
killing. The argument goes on that proponents of capital punishments
should not have to bear the burden of proving deterrence by
a reasonable doubt. Nor should the abolitionist have to prove
deterrence by a reasonable doubt -neither side would be able to
anyway.
b) Death Penalty Saves Lives
The question is whether execution of an innocent person is strong
enough to abolish the death penalty. Remember, the death penalty
De La Salle University, Manila, Philippines
November 28, 2017
saves lives. Repeat murders are eliminated and foreseeable murders
are deterred. You must consider the victim as well as the defendant.