[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=’Death wish’ tag=’h3′ style=’blockquote modern-quote’ size=” subheading_active=’subheading_below’ subheading_size=’15’ padding=’10’ color=” custom_font=”][/av_heading]
[av_textblock size=” font_color=’custom’ color=’#0a0a0a’]
Wednesday, February 22, 2017
[/av_textblock]
[av_textblock size=” font_color=’custom’ color=’#0a0a0a’]
THE House is set to advance the voting on the controversial bill reviving the death penalty. The Senate is also expected to commence consideration of at least five measures re-imposing death penalty which had been outlawed during the Arroyo administration.
So many questions need answers. Is there credible empirical evidence that death penalty is an effective deterrent to crimes? Can the Philippines renounce or withdraw from its commitment to international agreements which prohibit it from carrying out executions and compel it to take needed measures to abolish death penalty?
Rights groups have legitimate concerns, too. Under a justice system that is flawed if not downright rotten and a police force that is bungling and deeply involved in criminal activities, can death penalty give justice? Can death penalty resolve the many cases of killings of activists and ordinary civilians?
How many perpetrators and masterminds of human rights violations have been put to jail? If the State cannot prosecute those who wronged the people because they are in position or in power, who then will suffer and be sentenced with death penalty? And an erroneous death sentence is tragically irreversible.
To make death penalty palatable, the House majority decided to abandon mandatory executions in favor of giving trial judges the leeway to hand out either the lighter sentence of reclusion perpetua (30 years in prison, with the convict becoming eligible for possible conditional early release after serving just half of the term, or after 15 to 20 years), or the heavier punishment of death, to those found guilty of heinous crimes. This one is raises eyebrows. It’s not hard to imagine moneyed defendants receiving mere prison terms, if at all they get convicted, while destitute ones are bound to draw death sentences. Wealthy defendants who are able to retain the best criminal defense lawyers can escape conviction, or get the lesser punishment. If their expensive lawyers are not enough, the rich will simply buy their way out of death sentences, or even out of prison, by bribing corrupt prosecutors and judges.
Only a highly effective criminal justice system – one that is free from corruption and incompetence – can guarantee apprehension and sentencing. We must seek to empower, improve and modernize our criminal justice system to make it more effective and responsive to modern times. We must strengthen the process of criminal investigation that will expedite and improve the administration of the criminal justice system.
[/av_textblock]
[/av_one_full]
