PRO: Death Penalty Re-implemented in the Philippines
Death penalty is defined as the execution of offenders who take part of heinous
crimes that are sentenced to death after conviction by a court regarding the offense
committed. This must highly be distinguished from extra judicial killings, since extra
judicial killings do not have any due process in the law. This is not the case in death
penalty, since it should not be issued without fair trial and sufficient evidence. If death
penalty is only issued through fair trial, then it is totally just to enact such since it has
gone through due process in the court of law. Death penalty should be re-implemented
in the Philippines because it is a beneficial justice system.
First, death penalty was introduced as a good and effective way to lessen the
heinous crimes happening. Death penalty has been present in the Philippines since the
country was colonized. It was done during the Spanish, American, and Japanese
colonial periods. It continued until Pres. Ferdinand Marcos’s presidency, wherein his
main objective was to deter crime in the country. However, it was abolished by Pres.
Corazon Aquino under the 1987 Constitution. All of the death sentences were reduced
Reclusion Perpetua, and the criminals were placed to life imprisonment. Then, it was
brought back by Pres. Fidel Ramos during his presidency. However, it was abolished
once again by Pres. Gloria Macapagal Arroyo. Even with its abolishment, The House of
Representatives proposed a house bill on June 30, 2016. This bill proposes the re-
imposing of the death penalty on the abominable offenses and provide for its execution.
Death penalty will only be implemented if and only if a serious and heinous crime is
committed.
Second, death penalty has been used to influence the thinking of people in doing
crimes. The society has to implement and apply the use of the strongest punishment,
which in this case is death. If this is implemented, then it can be used in order to deter
potential offenders of heinous crimes. Haag (1983) states that, “Death penalty will deter
murder, if anything can. People fear nothing more than death. Therefore, nothing will
deter a criminal more than the fear of death.” If people are aware of the consequences
and have fear of certain death when committing serious crimes, then lesser heinous
crimes will be committed in the Philippines. It is either that people are scared of doing a
wrongful act leading to them not doing such, or people are not scared at all of the great
consequence of doing crimes leading to more crimes being done.
Third, it has been proven that death penalty has had a beneficial change to the
number of crime rates around the world. According to Roa (2017), 20 years ago, when
death penalty was still implemented in the Philippines, the crime rate –the number of
crime incident per 100,000 population– decreased from 145.7 in 1993 to 98 in 1998. In
addition, in a research conducted by the Penal Reform International, 17 years after the
death penalty referendum, over half of the respondents, at around 63.8%, are support in
of death penalty, and the remaining 36.2% of the respondents are against it. Also,
another study conducted by the Emory University researchers found out that more than
3,000 countries from 1977 to 1996 found that execution resulted in 18 fewer murders
per year. These statistics are shown if and only if the people do support it, which they
actually do. On November 8, 2016, voters in Nebraska, California and California were
asked if they were in favor of death penalty. Majority of the voters were in favor of death
penalty. The data show that there is a distinct factor leading to the amount of crimes
happening, and that there is a clear factor showing that death penalty has affected this
by lessening the amount of crimes. This also means that people are aware that heinous
crimes are being done around the world. Brauchler (2016) said, “Without the potential
of death penalty, there is no assurance that the offender would escape and murder
another victim. This is not justice.”
Fourth, death penalty is justifiable due to the accounts of heinous crimes that
have been committed in the past. One such example is the case of Fred Romano. He
was the lone survivor of an attack, and he witnessed his parents panic over their
daughter being murdered right in front of their very eyes. Fred Romano stated, “Death
penalty won’t bring closure. This is not even revenge. It’s justice.” Another case was
seen in 1995. Kristy Ohnstad was a 14 year old girl who was raped, chocked, and then
her head was covered by a plastic bag and beaten in the skull with a sledgehammer by
Clark Elmore. After what Elmore has done, does Elmore deserve to live a life where
eventually he will be free again?
Ban (2017) states that, “Death penalty doesn’t reduce the value of human life but
affirms the supreme value of innocent life.” With this, it important to know that death
penalty is a beneficial way to deter heinous crimes and save innocent lives. It has been
introduced a solution, has been pondered upon by the citizens, has had a beneficial
impact to the crime rate, and has been justified as an ultimate approach to been justice
to innocent lives. In conclusion, death penalty must be re-implemented in the
Philippines in order to secure a brighter future for the coming generations, the people of
tomorrow.
PROPOSITIONS
1. p q
2. p ʌ q
3. p q
4. p q
5. p q
6. p V q
7. p ʌ q
8. p q
9. p ʌ q
10. ~p
