A Position Paper On The Death Penalty in The Philippines [PDF]

Citation preview

A Position Paper on the Death Penalty in the Philippines By: Chivas Jhon Domingo Introduction The death penalty is a type of capital punishment in which a person is sentenced to death after the government has found them guilty of committing capital crimes or offences. The Philippines' death penalty is defined by 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, and other special penal laws, and for other purposes.



The death penalty is a form of capital punishment in which a person is sentenced to death after the government has found them guilty of serious crimes. 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, and other special penal laws, and for other purposes, defines the death penalty in the Philippines.



This paper discusses the benefits and drawbacks of the death penalty in the Philippines. While the death penalty is necessary to reduce the number of people who commit extremely serious crimes, it also violates the right to life.



Counter Arguments Years of deterrence research have concluded that the death penalty is no more of a deterrent than a life sentence. In fact, some criminologists believe that the death penalty has the opposite effect, namely, that it brutalizes society and thus increases the likelihood of more murders. Punishment has always been used by society to deter would-be criminals from committing crimes. Because society has the greatest interest in preventing murder, the most severe punishment available to deter murder should be used, which is the death penalty. If murderers are sentenced to death and executed, potential killers will be hesitant to kill for fear of losing their own lives. Another word for revenge is retribution. Although our natural reaction may be to inflict immediate pain on someone who has wronged us, mature society demands a more measured response. The desire for vengeance is insufficient justification for instituting a capital punishment system. Our laws and criminal justice system should lead us to higher principles that demonstrate complete respect for all human life, including that of a murderer. The chain of violence is extended by encouraging our baser motives for vengeance, which leads to another



killing. An eye for an eye, or a life for a life, is a simplistic concept that our society has never accepted. When someone takes another person's life, the balance of justice is thrown off. Unless that balance is restored, society will descend into chaos. Only the execution of the murderer restores the balance and allows society to demonstrate convincingly that murder is an unforgivable crime that will be met with a just punishment. Religious values have historically maintained that it is proper to take an "eye for an eye" and a life in retaliation. Offenders deserve the harshest penalty available under our legal system, which is the death penalty. Since increased safeguards and appeals were added to our death penalty system in the 1970s, there is no evidence that any innocent person has been executed. Even if such executions have taken place, they are extremely uncommon. Innocent people should not be imprisoned, but we cannot close the prisons because of that small risk. If improvements in the representation system or the use of scientific evidence, such as DNA testing, are required, those reforms should be implemented. The need for reform, on the other hand, is not a reason to abolish the death penalty. Furthermore, many of the claims of innocence made by those who have been released from death row are based on technicalities in the law. My Argument The death penalty is a symbol of justice. When we punish the guilty, justice will be served. It demonstrates quality; I've seen people being interviewed on television because one or more of their relatives died. There are those who are pleading for assistance and seeking justice for the deaths of their loved ones. I am certain that the only way for them to be relieved is for justice to be served. A serious crime requires a serious penalty, which is death. A person's dignity can be restored through justice.



Most people have a natural fear of death, according to Bedau H (1982). We have to think about what will happen before we act; if we don't think about it consciously, we will think about it unconsciously. Consider this: if every murderer died instantly, the homicide rate would be extremely low, because no one wants to die. We won't be able to do so, but if the justice system can make it more swift and severe, we might be able to change the laws to make capital punishment swifter and the appeals process shorter. The death penalty is significant because it has the potential to save the lives of thousands of potential victims. Conclusion One of the most contentious issues in the criminal justice system is the death penalty. There are numerous advantages and disadvantages to the death penalty today. People will be more inclined to support capital punishment if they properly weigh the arguments and have empathy for the victims. In fact, the majority of people in the Philippines today support it. However, more states must implement the death penalty.