As reported in BBC News, the United States Supreme Court stopped the execution of a death convict, pending a determination if the chemicals to be used in the execution would cause pain (based on the constitutional prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment). The challenge, however, is not based on the argument that the death penalty per se is unconstitutional.
The same is true in the Philippines, where the Philippine Supreme Court dismissed questions on the constitutionality of the Death Penalty Law (Republic Act No. 7659), in relation to the Lethal Injection Law (R.A. 8177). However, on 24 June 2006, Pres. Macapagal-Arroyo signed a new law – Republic Act 9346 – which prohibited the death penalty.
The debate for and against the death penalty had been vigorous. In fact, in Echegaray vs. Secretary of Justice (Leo Echegaray was executed after the re-imposition of the death penalty), the Philippine Supreme Court noted:
A last note. In 1922, the famous Clarence Darrow predicted that “x x x the question of capital punishment has been the subject of endless discussion and will probably never be settled so long as men believe in punishment.” In our clime and time when heinous crimes continue to be unchecked, the debate on the legal and moral predicates of capital punishment has been regrettably blurred by emotionalism because of the unfaltering faith of the pro and anti-death partisans on the right and righteousness of their postulates. To be sure, any debate, even if it is no more than an exchange of epithets is healthy in a democracy. But when the debate deteriorates to discord due to the overuse of words that wound, when anger threatens to turn the majority rule to tyranny, it is the especial duty of this Court to assure that the guarantees of the Bill of Rights to the minority fully hold. As Justice Brennan reminds us “x x x it is the very purpose of the Constitution – – – and particularly the Bill of Rights – – – to declare certain values transcendent, beyond the reach of temporary political majorities.” Man has yet to invent a better hatchery of justice than the courts. It is a hatchery where justice will bloom only when we can prevent the roots of reason to be blown away by the winds of rage. The flame of the rule of law cannot be ignited by rage, especially the rage of the mob which is the mother of unfairness. The business of courts in rendering justice is to be fair and they can pass their litmus test only when they can be fair to him who is momentarily the most hated by society.
Only recently, years after the Echegaray case was decided by the Supreme, the ruling still evoked controversy when Chief Justice Panganiban stated that the decision was a “judicial error“.
This debate will not end with the repeal of the Death Penalty Law. Subsequent heinous crimes have led some lawmakers and many citizens to call for the re-imposition of the death penalty. Let’s hear what’s on your mind.]
Update (February 2011): The debate on the death penalty has been rekindled with the murder of Emerson Lozano and Venson Evangelista. Pinoy is not keen on reinstating the death penalty, while VP Binay backs its revival. Let’s have an informal poll. Your opinion is still welcome below.
Loading ...- Calls to Reimpose the Death Penalty
- Declaration of presumptive death of a spouse for subsequent marriage
- Penalty for Failure to Indicate Mandatory Continuing Legal Education (MCLE) Compliance
- Extrajudicial Killings and Shoot-to-Kill Orders
Tinkering with internet tools comes with the bonus of better understanding how existing laws apply to the third wave - that of technology, particularly the internet. This is also a great medium to disseminate and discuss ideas across borders, time, color or creed. 
What? Godbless you!
we are a nation which cannot make up its mind;we passed the death penalty law but we clamored to abolish it. Now that it was abolished, we want it back. Where does this lunatic cycle end?
the death penalty must be restored. even the Catholic Church recognizes the necessity of death penalty in extreme cases. quoting from the book Cathechism of the Catholic Church, page 604, 1994 Ed.), it says:
“Preserving the common good of society requires rendering the agressor unable to inflict harm. For this reason the traditional teaching of the Church has acknowledged as well-founded the right and duty of legitimate public authority to punish malefactors by mean of penalties, commensurate with the gravity of the crime, not excluding, in cases of extreme gravity, the death penalty.”
Even the in the Bible, legal retribution for law breakers is recognized. Consider this: “life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand” (Exodus 21:23, 24).
the problem with our government is that the death penalty has become a political tool used by those in people in power to be supressed like an embarassing cough or to be brandished like a shining gun depending on the public mood and political expediency, instead of making it an immutable public policy.
Even in some states of the U.S., (the most enlightened country in the world), the death penalty still remains as a form of capital punishment. the effectiveness of the death penalty cannot be adequately measured until it has remained long enough in our statute books for us to conclude that it is not a deterrent to the commission of crimes. even assuming that it is not a deterrent, what about the right of the relatives of the victims to seek retribution? wouldn’t they feel relieved if it comes to their knowledge that the culprits have been exterminated by lethal injection?
I do believe that the victims and their relatives also have right to be vindicated.
Please do allow me to sing:
There comes a time
When we head a certain call
When the world must come together as one
There are people dying
And it’s time to lend a hand to life
The greatest gift of all
We can’t go on
Pretending day by day
That someone, somewhere will soon make a change
We are all a part of
God’s great big family
And the truth, you know love is all we need
[Chorus]
We are the world
We are the children
We are the ones who make a brighter day
So let’s start giving
There’s a choice we’re making
We’re saving our own lives
It’s true we’ll make a better day
Just you and me
Send them your heart
So they’ll know that someone cares
And their lives will be stronger and free
As God has shown us…
So we all must lend a helping hand
[Chorus]
We are the world
We are the children
We are the ones who make a brighter day
So let’s start giving
There’s a choice we’re making
We’re saving our own lives
It’s true we’ll make a better day
Just you and me
When you’re down and out
There seems no hope at all
But if you just believe
There’s no way we can fall
Well, well, well, well, let us realize
That a change will only come
When we stand together as one
[Chorus]
We are the world
We are the children
We are the ones who make a brighter day
So let’s start giving
There’s a choice we’re making
We’re saving our own lives
It’s true we’ll make a better day
Just you and me
@ mother theresa
you’re a Living Saint! I nominate you for the sainthood!
whythe crap do we have to include morality in death penalty discussions? its pointless and makes debate about the death penalty stretch to the point of no resolutions
The moral as well as religious issues behind the death penalty law will surely go on and on. What we need is a strong decision to keep the law or not. We need a firm hand on this volatile issue. The repealed death penalty law did not go farther than Leo Echegaray; the entire nation cried to abolish it. Now we have a senseless and utterly barbaric massacre in our midst, we want the death penalty law again. This national indecision is also evident in the oil deregulation law. Like a plank of wood aimlessly drifting in the midst of the ocean, we never really reach the shore.
Atty. Joselito D. Fernandez, a.k.a. pussycat, thank you for the plan… but that is not needed, my son! I am praying for you… and may you be a good christian lawyer-always. May God bless you and keep you. May you always be for justice and no other! Hope you do not misunderstood me? Indeed, we need to punish those who committed crimes, especially heinous crimes, but we SHALL NOT put everything into our hands. Human beings are prone to commit mistakes, AND if we commit mistake in our decision, it is usually fatal! Sometimes, innocent is the one that was punished while the true blooded criminal remains free! Isn’t it sad. Worst, if the person was punished and suffer the penalty because of the so called legal technicality! Funny isn’t it? And it is funnier if the criminal was freed because of technicality. What I mean is that, we must be a catalyst for the better; and killing the criminals will not help them reform… So there must be a better way otther than reviving death penalty. Worst, when the revival of death penaltyt becomes a vehicle for politic-king!
Godbless, atty!
OT: if you kill corrupt official in broad daylight using self defense to justify it, would it prosper… self defense since there is constant aggression on your part with that guys causing so many problems for the country with you being personally affected like rising gas, lack of medicare and the like. and since no court could touch him the only reasonable thing to do is to kill him.
The death penalty is BIBLICAL! I’ve read a good Christian book on Biblical Issues. In fact, its practice was well tolerated and codified during the time of the Old and New Testaments. They even used stoning to death as a means of execution during those times. Nowhere in the Bible did Jesus say that the death penalty is wrong. The Ten Commandments prohibited “Murder” not killing per se. Unlawful killing is ungodly and is a sin, unlike lawful executions based on heinous crimes. I don’t have the book with me now, but I gave Justice Gesmundo of the Sandiganbayan a copy of the chapter dealing with the death penalty.