The Proposition: On the Re-imposition of Death Penalty

First Speaker:

Honored Judges, fellow speakers, ladies and gentlemen, good evening.

This House believes that death penalty should be re-imposed on crimes as crucial component of an
effective dispensation of both reformative and retributive justice.

The death penalty in the Philippines was first abolished in 1987, making the Philippines the first country
in Asia to terminate death penalty. When an ex-military officer, Gen. Fidel Ramos, was elected president
in 1992, RA 7659 restoring the death penalty was signed into law. In 1996, RA 8177 was approved,
stipulating lethal injection as the method of execution.

On June 24, 2006, then-President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, apparently giving in to the call of the
Catholic Church, signed into law RA 9346, “An Act Prohibiting the Imposition of Death Penalty in the
Philippines.” All crimes punishable by death were commuted to life imprisonment or reclusion perpetua.

Tabloids, which widely publicize horrific crimes in the front pages, reinforce public fears that lawlessness
and criminality have reached unprecedented levels.

Some people really deserves to die and the government has the obligation to execute them. Why do we
support death penalty? In a word-Justice! In three words-They Deserve It! We the government believes
in retribution. As such, we believe that the past counts, it counts independently of the future. So the
wrong question to ask us about punishment is “what good it will do?”. The right question to ask us is
“what bad has been done?”.

Do you remember Christine Silawan? The 16-year old girl who was gruesomely murdered with her face
peeled off and with signs that she was raped. We say that no one deserves such violence, especially
when the victim is an innocent child. Such act desecrates human dignity and must be punished.

These sadistic killers who will rape, murder, torture and even peel off the face of their victims really
deserve to die and we have an obligation to kill them. It is no joke that successive killings are happening
in our society and it seems that the offenders have nothing to fear in committing these crimes. How
many Mitzi Balunsay should we allow to die and their body discovered already chopped inside a box?

We must sympathize with the family of the victims of these gruesome crimes by serving them justice
and not protect the evil doers. We must not be Angels of Satan. The opponent may argue that innocent
people may be killed by the re-imposition of death penalty. This only shows that they do not have
reliance on the judges of the court who will decide the cases brought before them. We will tell you that
if there is any mistake especially in the imposition of death penalty it is very rare, if there is anything at
all because the trial judge will decide the case carefully. There will be the prosecutor. There will be the
defense counsel. So both side are represented. Therefore, when a person is sentence to death and
finally executed, it is very rare that he is innocent.

Our criminal justice system has had to make do with penal laws that are perceived to be less than
dissuasive. There is evidently a need to reinvigorate the war against criminality by reviving a proven
deterrent coupled by its consistent, persistent and determined implementation.
In the interest of justice, public order and rule of law and the need to rationalize and harmonize the
penal sanctions, there is compelling reason to impose death penalty for these crimes, for being grievous,
odious and hateful offenses, which by reason of their inherent or manifest wickedness, viciousness,
atrocity and perversity are repugnant and outrageous to the common standards and norms of decency
and morality in a just, civilized and orderly society.

The State has the right and the exclusive use of force in enforcing the law to the exclusion of others,
therefore it can re-impose death penalty when it chooses especially that the Constitution does not
prohibit it. The Government is mindful of the fact that we have treaty obligations that might probably
raise concerns what will happen to these commitments under the treaty obligations, but then, we know
that treaty has the force and effect of the law but it cannot override or take precedence over what our
Constitution mandates.

As a conclusion, it is about time for the government to re-impose the death penalty in view of the rising
crimes being perpetrated out on the streets and homes even in broad daylight. Some of the murders
take place in full view of the public. Despite cameras on the streets, lampposts on roofs of houses and
shopping centers, the killers don’t seem to mind being identified. Some of the criminals are paid for
their dastardly act, because they know that even if they are caught alive they will spend time in prison
and eventually released or dug their way out of prison. Our jails are already overcrowded so it makes
sense to dispose of those who are found by the judge to be guilty beyond reasonable doubt and execute
them. It may not solve the crime entirely, but the killers may have to think twice before committing the
crime.

Thank you!