Te, Alexis Von A.
LLB - II
A Position Paper on the Death Penalty in the Philippines
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. Death penalty in the Philippines is stated on the Republic Act No. 7659 which is an
act to impose death penalty for certain heinous crimes, amending for that purpose the revised
penal laws, as amended, other special penal laws, and for other purposes.
Death penalty can be traced back during the Pre-Spanish time where Filipinos although
infrequent, were already practicing it. The Spanish also imposed it on locals who rebelled
against them and it was retained during the American period. During Martial Law between
the years 1965-1986, even though it was abolished during Cory Aquino’s term, it was re-
imposed when Ramos stepped into the presidency. It was also present in Estrada and
Arroyo’s term.
An argument may be made leaning towards the abolition of death peanlty. The
overwhelming conclusion from years of deterrence studies is that death penalty is, at best, no
more of a deterrent than a sentence of life in prison. Society has always used punishment is
discourage would-be-criminals from unlawful action. Since society has the highest interest in
preventing murder, it should use the strongest punishment available to deter murder, and that
is the death penalty. If criminals are sentence to death and executed, potential wrong doers
will think twice before killing for fear of losing their own life.
Although our first instinct may be to inflict immediate pain on someone who wrongs
us, the standards of a mature society demand a more measured response. The emotional
impulse for revenge is not a sufficient justification for invoking a system of capital
punishment. Our laws and criminal justice system should lead us to higher principles that
demonstrate a complete respect for life, even the life of a murderer. Encouraging our basest
motives for revenge, which ends in another killing, extends the chain of violence. The notion
of an eye for an eye, or a life, is a simplistic one which our society has never endorsed.
When someone takes a life, the balance of justice is disturbed. Unless that balance is
restored, society succumbs to a rule of violence. Only the taking of the murderer’s life
restores the balance and allows society to show convincingly that murder is an intolerable
crime which will be punishment in kind. Retribution has its basis in religious values, which
has historically maintained that it is proper to take an ‘’eye for an eye’’ and a life. Offenders
deserve the worst punishment under our system of law, and that is the death penalty.
There is no proof that any innocent person has actually been executed since increased
safeguards and appeals were added to our death penalty system in the 1970s. Even if such
executions have occurred, they are very rare. Imprisoning innocent people is also wrong, but
we cannot empty the prisons because of that minimal risk. If improvements are needed in the
system of representation, or in the use of scientific evidence such as DNA testing, then those
reforms should be instituted. However, the need for reform is not a reason to abolish death
penalty. Death penalty alone imposes an irrevocable sentence. Once an inmate is executed,
nothing can be done to make amends if a mistake has been made.
For the purpose of arguendo a counter argument may be made in the point of view of
people who refer to Death penalty as a show or enforcement of 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 crimes must have serious penalty and that is death. Justice can dignify
a person.
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 murderer who killed someone died instantly, the homicide rate would be very
low because no one like 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
appeals a shorter process. The death penalty is important because it could save the lives of
thousands of potential victims who are at stake.
To conclude Death penalty is one of the debatable issues in the criminal justice system.
Today, there are many pros and cons related to death penalty. However, if people weigh the
argument properly, death penalty is an easier form of escape from liability or responbility that
the offender owes to both the victim’s loved ones and the Republic. He will not have to suffer
any hardship for his actions, it is an easy way out from performing one’s obligation.
Reference List:
https://www.academia.edu/8644703/Background_History_of_Death_Penalty
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_the_Philippines
http://thelasallian.com/2017/02/05/revisiting-the-death-penalty/
