Review of Related Literature for Local References/sources

Death penalty in General

Asia remains a rich field of study for death penalty scholars because a comparatively large num-
ber of Asian countries continue to statutorily impose capital punishment, despite a worldwide
trend to abolish it. Asian countries (excluding China) handed down at least one-third of the
28,670 death sentences worldwide in 2021. The Philippines, the first Asian country to abolish the
death penalty, is also of interest because it continues to be the arena for one of the most ferocious
battles between the retentionists, who advocate for the retention or reinstatement of capital pun-
ishment, and the abolitionists. While the 1987 Philippine Constitution abolished the death
penalty, it also granted Congress the power to reimpose capital punishment through legislation. 1
The term "Death penalty" (Capital punishment) is derived from the Latin word "capitalis", which
is derived from the word caput, meaning head, with the implication that the head is the part asso-
ciated with life, head-loss punishment is depriving of an individual's life. "The death penalty" is
the most severe criminal sanctions of a state, resulting in deprivation of the right to life, perma-
nently excluding an individual from society.

Death Penalty in the Philippines

The Philippines abolished the death penalty under the 1987 Constitution. In 1993, however, capi-
tal punishment was reintroduced under Republic Act No. 7659 to address perceived rising crimi-
nality.2 Seven executions were committed in 1999, signaling the enforcement of the law and an
attempt to abate criminality. In the same year, criminality increased by 15.3%. 3

The Constitution grants the Congress the authority to impose the death penalty for compelling
reasons involving heinous crimes. it is therefore up to the Congress to determine the parameters
of what constitutes a heinous crime," As then Justice Secretary Guevarra told the press. 4

In 1993, capital punishment was restored under Republic Act 7659 during the term of former
President Fidel Ramos.

In 1996, Republic Act 8177 was passed, prescribing the use of lethal injection as the method of
carrying out capital punishment.

In 2006, former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo signed Republic Act 9346, which abolished
the death penalty and downgraded the maximum penalty for crimes to reclusion perpetua (im-
prisonment of up to 40 years) and life imprisonment.

1 Colmenares, Neri Javier, Analysing the Success of Death Penalty Campaigns in the Philippines: Strate-
gies, Tactics and Framing (2023)
2 An Act to Impose the Death Penalty on Certain Heinous Crimes, Republic Act No. 9346, (2006).
3 Commission on Human Rights of the Philippines, “The Philippine Experience in ‘Abolishing’ the Death
Penalty,” January 2007.
4 Pulta, Benjamin, Death penalty strong deterrent vs. crime: Guevarra, (2019)
Appeals from groups against the death penalty, which cited its non-deterrent effect in the com-
mission of crimes compelled the Philippine government to issue a moratorium. In 2003, de facto
moratorium on executions were lifted, but reprieves were since then issued on scheduled execu-
tions because of evidence that exonerated persons on death row. On 24 June 2006, R.A. 9346,
“An Act prohibiting the imposition of the Death Penalty in the Philippines” was enacted and ef-
fectively abolished the death penalty in the country, for the second time.

The May 2016 election of President Rodrigo Duterte, who vowed to reintroduce the death
penalty to combat drug trafficking in the Philippines and other crimes during his campaign,
posed a new serious threat to the protection of human rights in the country. On 7 March 2017,
the House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed Bill No. 4727 on the reinstatement of the
death penalty for drug-related and “heinous” crimes. 5

In his 5th State of the Nation Address (SONA) last July 27, 2020, President Rodrigo Duterte
called on Congress to swiftly pass the bill reinstating the death penalty, specifically for heinous
drug-related crimes specified under the Comprehensive Drugs Act of 2002. Pro-death penalty
lawmakers and advocates in the country have long argued that the death penalty will deter crimi-
nality. However, the literature suggests that there is still no clear and credible empirical evidence
to back the argument that the death penalty is a crime deterrent.6
Those who oppose the death penalty argue against its re-imposition on several grounds: 1) the
death penalty is anti-poor; 2) the death penalty does not deter the commission of crimes; 3) the
death penalty is disproportionate to the crime, even as classifying drug trafficking and other drug
related offenses as most serious crimes is questionable; 4) the high judicial error rate on capital
cases found upon review by the Philippine Supreme Court; and 5) the failure of government
agencies to prosecute drug suspects which highlights the weaknesses in drug investigations.7
A majority of Filipinos are supportive of the measure seeking to reimpose the death penalty for 7
drug offenses, a survey by the Social Weather Stations (SWS) revealed. 8

According to the First Quarter 2017 Social Weather Survey released on Tuesday, April 25, 61%
of Filipinos gave their nod to the controversial House Bill (HB) Number 4727, which gives
judges the option to punish drug convicts with either life imprisonment or death.

The death penalty, as applied in the Philippines before, was not only unnecessary in reducing
crime but also largely anti-poor: poor inmates were more likely to be sentenced to death than rich
inmates.
5 Philippines and the Death Penalty, Parliamentarians for Global Action, (2023) taken from:
https://www.pgaction.org/ilhr/adp/phl.html
6 Denial, Imelda, Death Penalty in the Philippines: Evidence on Economics and Efficacy, School of Reg-
ulation & Global Governance (RegNet), (2021), retrieved from: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?
abstract_id=3763271
7 Ungria, Maria Corazon A. The war on drugs, forensic science and the death penalty in the Philippines,
Forensic Science International: Synergy, Volume 3, 2021.
8 Cepeda, Mara. 61% of Filipinos approve of death penalty for drug convicts, Retrieved from:
https://www.rappler.com/nation/168025-sws-survey-filipinos-approve-death-penalty-drug-convicts/,
(2017)
Back in 2004 the Free Legal Assistance Group (FLAG) did a survey of 890 death row inmates. 9
Among other things, FLAG found that 79% of death row inmates did not reach college and 63%
were previously employed in blue-collar work in sectors like agriculture, transport, and construc-
tion.

The imposition of the death penalty does not deter the commission of crimes

The proponents of the death penalty in the House of Representatives and the Senate try to justify
its re-imposition by claiming that it is an effective deterrent to crimes. However, contrary to the
view of its proponents, there are no conclusive studies to show that the death penalty actually de-
ters crimes. 10

9 Punongbayan, Jc. Why the death penalty is unnecessary, anti-poor, error-prone, retrieved from:
https://www.rappler.com/voices/thought-leaders/161072-death-penalty-unnecessary-anti-poor-error-
prone/, (2017)
10 AmnestyInternational,WorldDayagainsttheDeathPenalty:NottheSolution to Drug-Related Crime, 2015,
pp. 1e30. London.