Ebuenga, Ma. Carmela O.

09/29/19
Fronda, Arabella M. 12 HUMSS-4
Jos, Anna Mikaela A. MiniTask 1

Title “how death penalty violates our rights as a human”

Killing people through the use of the death penalty is an irreversible act which has
wrongfully killed many innocent people across the world. It prohibits the correction of mistakes
by the justice system and leaves no room for human error, with the gravest of consequences.
Democratic and just societies are, by definition, required to provide due process to people before
the law. (BALAY REHABILITATION CENTER, nd).

In December 1993, President Ramos’ administration re-imposed the death penalty under
Republic Act (RA) 7659 adopted by Congress. The law listed a total of 46 crimes punishable by
death. Over the years, a number of new RAs and amendments to existing ones (8177, 8353 and
9165) further defined those acts punishable by death resulting in 52 capital offenses, 30 of which
were death-mandatory and 22 death-eligible. (BALAY REHABILITATION CENTER, nd).

The possibility of removing the right to live of every human, having discrimination against
the poor, and denies the opportunity of rehabilitation are some major arguments why the death
penalty should not be practiced in our country.

There are a lot of crimes happen in the past few years in the Philippines and until now, the
crimes are still happening. And as time passes by, the crimes are become more brutal, and some
criminals are becoming fearless because there is no frightened in their self anymore. That is why
some wanted to implement the death penalty for some criminals to be afraid in committing crimes
and to lessen the crimes happening in the country. But the justice system may bound to make
mistake and it is more cruel and unusual punishment.

Death penalty does not help to lessen the crimes yet it more promotes inhumane. And we
know that every human has the right to live. In the bible there are many verses that you can read
about the right to live on. There are also multitudinous number of organizations about the right of
every person to live in this society.
 According to the Equality and Human Rights Commissions that in protocol 13, article 1
that the death penalty should abolish in all circumstances, because they also state that sentencing
a person to death is a violation of the right to life and the right to freedom from torture and inhuman
or degrading treatment. The Equality and Human Rights Commissions also have The Human
Rights Acts in article 2 that will protect your right to live explaining that the courts have decided
that the right to life does not include a right to die, this means that nobody, including the
Government, can try to end your life. It also means the Government should take appropriate
measures to safeguard life by making laws to protect you and, in some circumstances, by taking
steps to protect you if your life is at risk. Public authorities should also consider your right to life
when making decisions that might put you in danger or that affect your life expectancy (Equality
and Human Rights Commissions, 2018).

Based on the article 247 of the revised penal code of the Philippine Commission on Women
that every people has the right to life and security of spouses and daughter, it stated that there are
the so-called laws in defense of honor. Under such laws, husbands or family members are
exempted from criminal liability for the murders or other forms of violence they committed against
their wives, daughters or sisters. (Philippine Commission on Women , 2009)

The Philippine and other country are still celebrating the world day against the death
penalty every October, 10 (Branson, 2017). Knowing the every people has the right to live in this
world, no one is allowed to punish or kill someone. Only God has the power to get a life of someone
because we also know that there is a reason behind our existence. Based on the Republic Act. No.
10368 law of the Philippine that the state should value the dignity of every human person and
guarantee full respect for human rights (LAWPhil, 2013). And punish people to kill is contrary to
our human rights so basically the death penalty should not implement or practice.

But it is cruel and unusual punishment that will be charge in the criminals because we all
has second chances but it is depends on the situation, or depends on the morals of one person if
they really wanted to change or not and depends on the crimes that they made. But we can believe
that if you still exist or alive you can still change. Also the justice here in our country is poor
because some are paying someone to confess the crime of other to have money.
 In the 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippine – Article III, Section 14 (2)
that in all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall be presumed innocent until the contrary is
prove, and shall enjoy the right to be heard by himself and counsel, to be informed of the nature
and cause of the accusation against him, to have a speedy, impartial, and public trial, to meet the
witnesses face to face, and to have compulsory process to secure the attendance of witnesses and
the production of evidence in his behalf. However, after arraignment, trial may proceed
notwithstanding the absence of the accused provided that he has been duly notified and his failure
to appear is unjustifiable. (Official Gazette, 2019)

In some aspects, the death penalty would also turn down the purpose or function of
rehabilitation centers. According to Connect Network (2016), there are different kinds of
rehabilitation. And one of the most important is the Educational Rehabilitation that will help a lot
of inmates leave prison more educated than when they enter the jail. Also, it helps change the
landscape of educational offering for inmates.

Crime Museum (2017) mentioned that research has consistently shown that time spent in
prison does not successfully rehabilitate most inmates, and the majority of criminals return to a
life of crime almost immediately. But according to my own standpoint, the fact that rehabilitation
center has helped only a number of people, rehabilitation is still needed to give every prisoners
their right to second chances. Also, rehabilitation centers provides mental and physical exercises
according to Connect Network (2016) that are proven to provide long term benefits including
stress/anger management among others which is for me, helps the inmates to prevent from doing
crimes.

There are different types of Rehabilitation for Prisoners according to Legal Beagle (2018).
First is the Educational Rehabilitation that helps inmates increase their skills in different areas such
as learning English and obtaining college level coursework. Second, Spiritual Rehabilitation in
which inmates are free to practice any religion of their choices, including no religion at all. This is
where community leaders and organizations volunteer their time to provide worship services and
other spiritual practices in agreement with prison rules. Next is the Work Programs which provides
inmates some respective benefits such as structured work day, job experience and and the ability
to practice positive team-building skills, that can help inmates be prevalent to jobs and also, to
introduce them into new job skills. Lastly, Transitional Programs in wherein Rehabilitation
Centers provides programs that will help the inmates prepare for release and then guide them back
to successful reentry to society.

Along with the Republic Act 9346 or the Capital Punishment, also known as the Death
Penalty, which allows a person to be sentenced death by the state as a punishment for a crime. So
with this, the rehabilitation centers will be nonfunctional if people would not be given the chance
to be trained and be re-educated through rehabilitation. Also, the RA 9346 turns down the chance
of people to change as well as the sense of punishment.

Moreover, the death penalty does not justify as a needed action because it results to the
issue of discrimination. As argued by Amnesty International (1997), The fact that the majority of
those who are sentenced by death penalty come from disadvantaged sectors of society and because
of economic deprivation, lack of proper education or low social status; are among those least able
to secure legal counsel, implies that in practice not all Filipinos are equal before the law, and that
death penalty is being appertained irrationally against members of more disadvantaged sectors of
society.

According to Michigan State University and Death Penalty Information Center (2000),
Discretion has always been an essential part of our system of justice. No one expects the prosecutor
to pursue every possible offense or punishment, nor do we expect the same sentence to be imposed
just because two crimes appear similar. Each crime is unique, both because the circumstances of
each victim are different and because each defendant is different. The Supreme Court has held that
a mandatory death penalty which applied to everyone convicted of first degree murder would be
unconstitutional. Hence, we must give prosecutors and juries some discretion.

In fact, there are more poor people that are executed in this country than rich people. And
even if the poor are irrationally represented on death row, rationally the poor commit more murders
than the rich (Michigan State University and Death Penalty Information Center, 2000). But to my
opinion, discrimination should not be tolerated especially in this issue. It is clear that death penalty
is applied unfairly and biased. If there is just an organized justice system in the Philippines that is
not obviously favoring the upper-class men, then our country might deserve this death penalty.

The death penalty is essentially an imperious punishment. There are no intent rules or
guidelines for when a prosecutor should seek the death penalty, when a jury should commend it,
and when a judge should give it. This lack of objective, measurable standards ensures that the
exercise of the death penalty will be discriminatory against racial, gender, and ethnic groups. It is
arbitrary when someone in one county receives the death penalty, but someone who commits a
cognate crime in another county is given a life sentence (Michigan State University and Death
Penalty Information Center, 2000). Often those who can only swing a minimal defense are selected
for the death penalty. Until race and other arbitrary factors, like economics and geography, can be
excluded as a determinant of who lives and who dies, the death penalty must not be habituated.

It is evident that discrimination has a huge factor concerning death penalty because death
sentences are being imposed in an arbitrary, inconsistent manner which falls irrationally on poorer,
disadvantaged sectors of society. Judicial errors are possible since the country’s justice system is
not organized or properly given attention.

In the final analysis, with or without death penalty, people will still perform crimes. As
much as there have been some studies elucidating that death penalty is an operative form of
deterrence, they lack in conclusive testament to validate that people are deterred. The death
penalty, therefore, is not effective and should be totally forbidden.
References
BALAY REHABILITATION CENTER. (nd). Fact Sheet: Note on the death penalty and the Philippines. Retrieved
from balayph.net: https://balayph.net/news-events/features-and-articles/128-fact-sheet-note-
on-the-death-penalty-and-the-philippines-2

Branson, R. (2017, October 10). Worlds day against the death penalty. Retrieved from virgin.com:
https://www.virgin.com/richard-branson/world-day-against-death-penalty

Equality and Human Rights Commissions. (2018, November 15). Article 2: Right to life. Retrieved from
equalityhumanrights: https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/human-rights-act/article-2-
right-life

LAWPhil. (2013, Febuary 25). AN ACT PROVIDING FOR REPARATION AND RECOGNITION OF VICTIMS OF
HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS DURING THE MARCOS REGIME, DOCUMENTATION OF SAID
VIOLATIONS, APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES. Retrieved from
lawphil.net: https://www.lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2013/ra_10368_2013.html

Official Gazette. (2019, September 27). THE 1987 CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES –
ARTICLE III. Retrieved from officialgazette.gov.ph:
https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/constitutions/the-1987-constitution-of-the-republic-of-the-
philippines/the-1987-constitution-of-the-republic-of-the-philippines-article-iii/

Philippine Commission on Women . (2009). Upholding the Right to Life and Security of Spouses and
Daughters: Repealing Article 247 of the Revised Penal Code. Retrieved from pcw.gov.ph:
https://www.pcw.gov.ph/wpla/upholding-right-life-and-security-spouses-and-daughters-
repealing-article-247-revised-penal-code