Blog 1:

"Should death penalty be re-imposed in the Philippines?"

Death sentences have been implemented in the Philippines since the beginning of the Spanish
era, the Martial Law period, and Fidel Ramos and Estrada’s time in the country, particularly in
cases of so-called heinous crimes. The death penalty should not be enforced in the Philippines
because the judicial system is faulty and violates the constitutional right of a human being. The
idea of putting another human to death is hard to completely fathom. The physical mechanisms
of execution are simple to comprehend, but the feelings involved in carrying out a death sentence
on someone else, regardless of how much they deserve it, are beyond my comprehension.
There is a potential of malfunction in the system, such as making an inadequate lawyer represent
the defendant, insufficient or lacking facts, and untrustworthy witnesses. If a discrepancy
happens and an innocent person is executed, the obligation lies with the justice system, not with
the death penalty. The second point against capital punishment is that it is administered unfairly.
According to statistics, the poor and minorities are more likely to face the death penalty.
Unfortunately, it cannot be argued that the wealthier are more likely to obtain a lighter sentence,
and this bias is incorrect. However, this is yet another weakness in our existing legal framework.
Ethnic and economic stigma is not a legitimate reason to oppose the death penalty. It is an
argument against the courts and their arbitrary punishment scheme.
If capital punishment were used in the country, the overwhelming majority of instances would
result in innocent citizens being wrongfully convicted. The Philippines' judicial system could be
swayed by authority, capital, power, and fraud. Due to the rich and influential men manipulating
the case decision, it makes no difference if the accused is guilty or innocent of the crime because
the outcome would be based on their choice. Forged testimony, false witnesses, or forced
confessions can then be used to manipulate the prosecution. The convicted man will then have
to be indicted by the court for his supposed crime. As a result, innocent people are killed without
the possibility of parole or freedom. The Commission dismissed the death penalty advocates'
claim of deterrence and retribution, warned of the possibility of irreversible judicial error, and
emphasized that the solution to rising crime lies inefficient law enforcement, fair administration
of justice, and a sensitive penal system.
Therefore, the death penalty should not be enforced because it contradicts the constitutional
right of a human being and the criminal justice system is flawed. If the authorities in the
Philippines want to address the root causes of drug-related offenses, they should support
humane, voluntary, health-focused, and evidence-based policies as an alternative. No man
deserves to die as a result of his crime; life imprisonment is a safer way to sentence a criminal.
There would be far too many issues if capital punishment were used. Innocent citizens will die as
a result of the justice system's carelessness in treating the case and their failure to protect
themselves effectively.