[av_one_full first min_height=” vertical_alignment=” space=” custom_margin=” margin=’0px’ padding=’0px’ border=” border_color=” radius=’0px’ background_color=” src=” background_position=’top left’ background_repeat=’no-repeat’ animation=”]
[av_heading heading=’UN General Assembly’ tag=’h3′ style=’blockquote modern-quote’ size=” subheading_active=’subheading_below’ subheading_size=’15’ padding=’10’ color=” custom_font=”]
BY OSCAR CRUZ
[/av_heading]
[av_textblock size=” font_color=” color=”]
Friday, June 30, 2017
[/av_textblock]
[av_textblock size=” font_color=” color=”]
“MINDFUL that any miscarriage or failure of justice in the implementation of the death penalty is irreversible and irreparable, convinced that a moratorium on the use of death penalty contributes to the respect for human dignity and to the enhancement and progressive development of human rights and considering that there is no conclusive evidence of the deterrent value of death penalty, the UN General Assembly calls upon states to establish a moratorium on executions with a view of abolishing the death penalty and calls upon States which have abolished the death penalty not to re-introduce it…” (Resolution No. 65-206, 21 December 2010)
So it is that no less than the General Assembly of the United Nations, with a given ascendancy in addressing such dignified and dignifying matters as the respect for human rights – which categorically and definitely includes the right to life as the premise of all other rights attributed to every human person – thus in one word or another proclaims the following signal truths drawn from the above citation:
One, no justice system of any nation may claim infallibility in its judgments in all cases at all times.
Two, no implemented sentence of death penalty is reversible at any time the judgment prove to be wrong.
Three, death sentences are carried out with no guarantee that thereafter the rule of law, the reign of justice and the regime of peace will come to fore.
Four, in countries where the law on death penalty has been abolished, let it stay this way.
Five, in countries where the death penalty Law has been suspended, let it thus remain ever.
So it is: That truly civilized Countries have altogether done away with death penalty – considering that when a government kills killers, the former becomes a killer as well. That death penalty is not absolute guarantee for the absence of heinous crimes – considering that Countries still observing the death penalty Law continue to have heinous criminals. That there is yet no perfect justice system in the world even but taking note of the standing fact that there is no judicial process ad its pursuant decision that may claim downright inerrancy, infallibility.
When a country is quite poor in its capital resources, basically divested of labor opportunities, sadly wanting in industrial ventures, burdened by basically rich and powerful political figures, wallowing in poverty plus a much used and abused justice system – these are the elements certifying that death penalty should be alien to the Philippines.
It is not difficult to understand and thus agree to the truth that death penalty is in fact in the realm of vengeance – a vengeance which in effect is not only fatal but also irreversible. The government has the non-debatable prerogative to deny or cancel certain human rights from individuals for having done this or that misdeed – all in view of restoring if not fortifying social order.
But when nothing less than human lives are done away with through the death penalty law, what other human rights are left to the dead individual concerned?/PN
[/av_textblock]
[/av_one_full]
