HISTORY OF DEATH

PENALTY
First established under
the rule of King
Hammurabi of Babylon
in the eighteenth
century B.C.

Popular in the reigns of

fourteenth and
seventh century where
capital punishment
was the only
punishment awarded
to all kind of crimes.
STORY OF DEATH
PENALTY
Example:
Crucifixion:
as how
Jesus Christ
was believed
to have been
put to death
MOST COMMON PRACTICES
Hanging the person to death
administering a lethal
injection to the person
high
electrocution; supplying
volt electric shock to the
person (usually performed by making
the person seated in the electric chair)
garroting;
strangulating the
person to death lethal gassing;
suffocating him to death using
a deadly gas firing a person to death
using a firing squad making
him consume poison,
MOST COMMON PRACTICES
live burial by burning
alive,
drowning to death,

stoning to death,
guillotine beheading or
decapitation - the practice of slicing
his head using a sharp blade.
N THE PHILIPPINES
DuringSpanishcolo
nial rule,
Most common
method of
executions:
shooting by
thefiring squad
garrotte(a notable
case would be
theGomburza.)
 IN THE PHILIPPINES
1946 to 1986

The capital crimes after regaining full

independence were murder,rapeand treason.

In total, 51 people were electrocuted up to

1961.
THE PHILIPPINES
Marcial "Baby"
Ama,
electrocuted at
the age of 16 on
October 4, 1961
for murders
committed while
in prison for lesser
charges.

THE PHILIPPINES

The electric chair was used

until 1976, when execution
by firing squad eventually
replaced it as the sole
method of execution.

During the Marcos regime,

however,countless more
peoplewere summarily
executed, tortured, or
simply disappeared for
opposition to his rule
IN THE PHILIPPINES
After Marcoswas
deposedin 1986, the
newly
draftedConstitutionlimit
ed the application of the
death penalty to only a
few crimes.

This in practice meant

that it was abolished,
making the Philippines
the first Asian country to
do so.
 The Ramos Administration
re-imposed the death
penalty by virtue of
REPUBLIC ACT NO. 7659

AN ACT TO IMPOSE THE

DEATH PENALTY ON CERTAIN
HEINOUS CRIMES, AMENDING
FOR THAT PURPOSE THE
REVISED PENAL LAWS, AS
AMENDED, OTHER SPECIAL
PENAL LAWS, AND FOR OTHER
PURPOSES
IN THE PHILIPPINES
The first
execution
bylethal
injectiontook
place
under,Joseph
Estrada in 2001.
THE PHILIPPINES
Estrada's own
successor,Gloria Macapagal
Arroyo, was a vocal opponent
and also approved a
moratorium, but later
permitted executions and
deniedpardons.

On 15 April 2006, the

sentences of 1,230death
rowinmates were commuted
tolife imprisonment, in
whatAmnesty
Internationalbelieves to be
the "largest ever
commutation of death
sentences"
 WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO THOSE WHO WERE
SENTENCED OF DEATH PENALTY BEFORE ITS
IMPOSITION WAS PROHIBITED ?
REASONS FOR THE PROHIBITION
OF DEATH PENALTY
1. It inflicts traumatic pain not just on the convict
but also on the family, even if the penalty is not
carried out
2. There is no convincing evidence that it acts
effectively as a deterrent of serious crimes
3. Penology favors reformative rather than vindictive
penalties
4. Life is too precious a gift to be placed at the
discretion of a human judge
5. The law itself, by imposing so many safeguards
before a death penalty is carried out, manifests a
reluctance to impose the death penalty
 THERE IS NO CONVINCING EVIDENCE THAT IT ACTS
EFFECTIVELY AS A DETERRENT OF SERIOUS CRIMES

In Asia,
SINGAPORE vs. HONG
KONG
(with death penalty) (without death
penalty)

"homicide levels and trends are remarkably similar in these

two cities over the 35 years after 1973, with neither the surge
in Singapore's executions nor the more recent steep drop
producing any differential impact"
THERE IS NO CONVINCING EVIDENCE THAT IT ACTS
EFFECTIVELY AS A DETERRENT OF SERIOUS CRIMES
PENOLOGY FAVORS REFORMATIVE RATHER THAN
VINDICTIVE PENALTIES

According to Machiavellis theory, inflicting

fear to people is a more effective way to
promote order in a society. And fear will be
inflicted through punishment.

Trying to associate to John Lockes theory

that rehabilitation is an effective remedy in
a society, inflicting fear will be more
effective if the purpose is to rehabilitate
but not to punish.
 CONCLUSION
DIFFICULTY in IMPLEMENTING:

It is evident that there is no difficulty in

its implementation because its main
purpose was achieved, i.e. to prohibit
Death Penalty.
 CONCLUSION
IN RELATION TO HUMAN DEVELOPMENT and
NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

If you have witnessed or you have experienced it

yourself to be raped or a part of your family be murdered
or killed, you might have thought of killing the criminal or
if not, wished that there be death penalty.

President Duterte has been loud of his desire to

reinstitute Death Penalty because of this main reason- the
retribution for the victims and not mainly to deter crimes.
 CONCLUSION
IN RELATION TO HUMAN DEVELOPMENT

If we look at the root causes of these criminalities,

we can see reasons like poverty (walang makain),
lack of education and of formation of values. If the
state pays more attention to these basic needs of
human beings there would be less crimes. There
would be no need to try scaring criminals into
behaving well with the threat of being put to death
by the government.
 CONCLUSION
IN RELATION TO HUMAN DEVELOPMENT

However, there are those who commit crimes

because of Profit. They are those who operate in what
we call the syndicated crimes. These are organized
group of criminals who can manipulate government
officials. They are the BIG TIME criminals who use the
poor Filipinos as their market and bait. And once the
poor Filipinos got trapped in their bait, they become the
accused when in fact they themselves are victims.

In catching these BIG TIME CRIMINALS, there isnt a

necessity to resort to DEATH PENALTY because as
discussed, they are not the ones being caught. Instead,
 REFERENCES
http://www.gluckman.com/Death%27Penalty.
htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_the_Philippin
es

http://deathpenalty.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=
002000

http://www.pinoyrepublic.net/cbcp-official-rejects-manila-mayor
-estradas-call-to-revive-death-penalty/#sthash.VNJ8NN4b.dpuf

file:///C:/Users/acer/Downloads/AAG%202013-05%20-%20Crime
%20Statistics.pdf
The difficulty now lies when such punishment be instituted
again. Questions like What will happen to those who were
sentenced of Death Penalty but were not served because of its
abolition? Will they be served their punishment? which will
be answered, of course, if its reinstitution be actualized.

The Constitution, on the other hand, does not abolish Death Penalty
in its totality. It only prohibits the imposition if death. (People v
Guevarra, 155 SCRA 327)

May Congress restore it in the future?

YES. If the following are met:

1. Define what is meant by heinous crimes
2. Specify and Penalize by death, only crimes that qualify as
heinous in accordance with the definition set
3. Be motivated by compelling reasons involving heinous crimes