The imposition of the penalty of death is hereby prohibited.

What Laws or Policy are currently in place regarding the issue?

RA. No.7659, also known as the Death Penalty Law, is repealed or amended, as are all other

laws, executive orders, and decrees that impose the death penalty. Instead of the death

penalty, the following punishments will be imposed: (a) the penalty of reclusion perpetua when

the law violated employs the Revised Penal Code's nomenclature of penalties; or (b) the

penalty of life imprisonment when the law violated does not use the Revised Penal Code's

nomenclature of penalties. Persons convicted of reclusion perpetua offenses or whose

sentences will be reduced to reclusion perpetua as a result of this Act are ineligible for parole

under Act No. The Board of Pardons and Parole shall cause the names of persons convicted of

offenses punishable by reclusion Perpetua or life imprisonment under this Act who are being

considered or recommended for commutation or pardon to be published at least once a week

for three consecutive weeks in a general circulation newspaper: provided, however, that

nothing herein shall limit the President's power to grant executive clemency under Section 19,

Article VII of the Constitution.

Where?

Although the Philippines was the first Asian country to abolish the death penalty under the

1987 Constitution, it was reinstated in 1993 during President Fidel Ramos' administration to

address rising crime rates, only to be abolished again in 2006 after then-President Gloria

Macapagal-Arroyo signed legislation reducing the maximum punishment to life imprisonment.

On 20 November 2007, the country signed and ratified the Second Optional Protocol to the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights aimed at abolition of the death penalty

(ICCPR-OP2).

During his campaign, President Rodrigo Duterte promised to reintroduce the death penalty to

combat drug trafficking in the Philippines and other crimes, posing a new serious threat to the

country's protection of human rights. On March 7, 2017, the House of Representatives passed

Bill No. 4727, which reinstated the death penalty for drug-related and "heinous" crimes.

However, the Bill remained stalled in the Senate for several months due to a lack of support

from Senators, including several PGA Members who publicly spoke out against the country's

reintroduction of capital punishment.

Nonetheless, the May 2019 midterm elections, which gave President Duterte's party (PDP-

Laban) a majority in the Senate, relaunched the pro-death penalty movement, and 18 bills on

the subject were introduced in the House of Representatives in September of that year. Despite

being unsuccessful, another attempt was made in 2020, following a shooting in Tarlac.

On March 2, 2021, the House of Representatives passed House Bill No. 7814, allowing the

reintroduction of the death penalty under the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002 -

the second bill in five years to pass to the Senate proposing a return to capital punishment.

However, support from Senators who previously supported such reinstatement has dwindled,

reducing the likelihood of a return to the use of capital punishment.

Overall, vigilance is required, particularly in light of the election of Ferdinand 'Bongbong'

Marcos Junior as President and Sara Duterte as Vice President in May 2022. The threat of

reintroducing the death penalty in the Philippines remains dormant.

Both the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and its Second Optional

Protocol aimed at abolition of the death penalty (ICCPR-OP2) were ratified by the Philippines in

1986 and 2007.

What is the current law, and why is it perceived as needing reform?

Human Rights Watch said today that the Philippine House of Representatives should reject a

proposal to reinstate the death penalty. On November 29, 2016, the Judicial Reforms

Subcommittee of Congress approved Congress House Bill No. 1 (Death Penalty Law), which

would reinstate the death penalty for "heinous crimes" such as murder, piracy, and drug

trafficking and possession. A vote in the House on the bill is expected before the end of 2016.

"The Philippine government should recognize the barbarism of the death penalty and reject any

attempts to reinstate it," said Phelim Kine, deputy Asia director. "The failure of the death

penalty as a deterrent to crime is widely acknowledged, and the government should maintain

its prohibition on its use."

The International Drug Policy Consortium (IDPC), a network of nongovernmental organizations

focused on drug production, trafficking, and use, urged all members of the Philippine House of

Representatives and Senate to uphold the right to life enshrined in the 1987 Philippines

Constitution in a joint letter. The Philippines is also a signatory to the International Covenant on

Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and its Second Optional Protocol on the Abolition of the Death

Penalty (ICCPR). The consortium also urged Philippine lawmakers to ensure proportionate

sentencing for drug offenses in order to protect the vulnerable, as well as to invest in harm

reduction strategies to protect Filipinos' health and well-being.

The UN Human Rights Committee and the special rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary, or

arbitrary executions have concluded that the death penalty for drug offenses does not meet the

requirement of "most serious crime," and the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights

reaffirmed in September 2015 that "persons convicted of drug-related offences... should not be

subject to the death penalty."

The Philippine government abolished the death penalty under article III, section 19 of the 1987

constitution. President Fidel Ramos reimposed the death penalty in 1993 as a “crime control”

measure, but President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo reinstated abolition in 2006.

Because of its inherent cruelty, Human Rights Watch opposes the death penalty in all

circumstances.

The Philippines' international legal obligations would be violated if the death penalty was

reinstated. According to the Second Optional Protocol to the ICCPR, "no one shall be executed

within the jurisdiction of a State Party to the present Protocol," and "each State Party shall take

all necessary measures to abolish the death penalty within its jurisdiction."

Human rights law restricts the death penalty to "the most serious crimes," typically crimes

resulting in death or serious bodily harm, where the death penalty is permitted. In a March

2010 report, the UN Office on Drugs and Crime urged member countries to prohibit the use of

the death penalty for drug-related offenses, while also encouraging countries to take an overall

"human rights-based approach to drug and crime control."

The UN Human Rights Committee and the special rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary, or

arbitrary executions have concluded that the death penalty for drug offenses does not meet the
requirement of "most serious crime," and the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights

reaffirmed in September 2015 that "persons convicted of drug-related offences... should not be

subject to the death penalty."