Death Penalty to be Imposed as Capital Punishment

Death is the ultimate destination of life.

The congress of the Philippines in the past had already

enacted laws which imposed death penalty for certain

crimes. “The state has the right to punish the criminal

to protect, prevent, reform, set example and to

ensure that justice is served and done” 1. Thus in

People v Carillo 85 Phil 611, 635 the Supreme Court said

“When the person has proved himself to be

dangerous enemy of the society, the State must

protect itself from such enemy by taking his life in

retribution for his offenses and as example and

warning to others.” 2 The State had to punish the

criminals according to the degree or their propensity. As one

of the juridical conditions of the penalty is

commensurability3.

The 1987 Constitution is not so quite about the

inflicting capital punishment, thus:

Excessive fines shall not be imposed, nor cruel, degrading or inhuman punishment be inflicted. Neither shall the death penalty be imposed, unless for compelling reasons involving heinous crimes, the Congress hereafter provides for it. Any death penalty imposed will be reduced to reclusion pertpetua.4

Death penalty would be an exception to the provisions of the

Constitution and the Constitution itself delegated such duty

to the Congress on whether or not they will impose death

penalty for heinous crimes.

What is meant by heinous anyway? To fully

comprehend, let us first define the word heinous. According

to the 2010th edition of Meriam Webster Encylopedia:

It originated from Anglo-French hainus, heinous from haine means hate, from hair to hate, of Germanic origin; akin to Old High German haz means hate. This was first use in the 14th century. It means very bad or evil; deserving of hate or contempt; hatefully or shockingly evil.5

What is crime? Crime is defined in the New

International Webster’s Comprehensive Dictionary as an act

that subjects the doer to legal punishment; the

commission/omission of an act specifically forbidden or

enjoined by law; any grave offense against morality or social

order; wickedness; inequity.6

The Revised Penal Code has defined the crime or delito.

It was subdivided into two, the delito by means of dolo that

is with deliberate intent to perpetrate an act or omission,

and delito by culpa means with imprudence, negligence, lack

of foresight and lack of skills.7

In integrating the definitions of the words, heinous

crimes means a very bad or evil act deserving of hate or

contempt that subjects the doer to legal punishment; or the

commission or omission of a very bad or evil act specifically

forbidden or enjoined by law; or a very bad or evil and grave

offense against morality or social order.

Way back in our history, during the pre-colonial era

where the rule of “eye for an eye, or tooth for a tooth” is

subsisting, death penalty through hanging was prominent.

They had punished crimes that are not comprehensible by

man’s natural reasoning. Even during the colonial times, in

the Spanish occupation, there were crimes that are

punishable by death penalty through “garrote” or firing

squad, a remarkable example is the death of Dr. Jose P.

Rizal, our national hero. Prior to the declaration of Martial

Law by the deposed President Marcos, this topic is of no big

deal. However, with the ratification of the 1987 Constitution,

this becomes a big issue. Specially that the Justice System of

our country was flawed by the Marcos regime. Nonetheless,

the judicial image was subsequently repaired.

In the present days, where the criminality of the society

is exponentially rising, pushing away all the potentials our

country had. Series of serious crimes such as drug

trafficking, human trafficking, statutory rape, murders,

plunder, graft and corruption, kidnapping and or serious

illegal detention and other heinous crimes as the law

defines.

These are crimes that orbits on a moral code that

escapes undisputable true proof. The communities

would dive into anarchy if they could not act on

moral assumptions less certain than the sun will rise

in the east and set in the west. Those who are

against may contend that the death penalty is

inherently immoral because governments should

never take human life, no matter what the

provocation, but that is an article of faith

Despite of the efforts and approaches our government has

done, still it cannot held back the rising rate of criminality.

Not only that, the present situation wherein the law

enforcers are the subject of the crime itself. It is very

fearsome to know that the criminals are just luring around us

cloaking.

"The crimes of rape, torture, treason, kidnapping, murder, larceny, and perjury pivot on a

moral code that escapes apodictic [indisputably true] proof by expert testimony or otherwise. But

communities would plunge into anarchy if they could not act on moral assumptions less certain

than that the sun will rise in the east and set in the west. Abolitionists may contend that the death

penalty is inherently immoral because governments should never take human life, no matter what

the provocation. But that is an article of faith, not of fact. The death penalty honors human dignity

by treating the defendant as a free moral actor able to control his own destiny for good or for ill; it

does not treat him as an animal with no moral sense.