Impact Assessment of Death Penalty - A Basis for Reinstatement of

Death Penalty in the Philippines

Bernice Ruth O. Siatong and Orlando de Villa

Executive Summary/Purpose Statement

The revival of death penalty is a recent report that explores the prospect
of re-establishing capital punishment. Our present administration under
President Rodrigo Roa Duterte, had said he would be “happy to slaughter”
drug addicts, and since he took office in June, some 7,000 people have been
killed in drug-related operations, according to the Philippine National Police.
Now he proposes to reinstate the death penalty, which was abolished here in
2006.

A new bill, up for discussion in the House of Representatives this week,

proposes to restore capital punishment for 21 crimes. Those include treason,
some forms of murder and rape, and violent car thefts and drug offenses. If
the act passes, the import, sale, manufacture, cultivation or possession of
drugs, even in quantities as low as 10 grams for methamphetamines or
marijuana oil, will all be punishable by death.

With Congress now back in session, the proposal could pass the full
House of Representatives in a matter of weeks. To become law, the bill would
then have to be approved by the Senate and be signed by the president.

The Philippines’s history with the death penalty is painful and

complicated. Spanish colonizers used it to put down uprisings in the late
1800s; Ferdinand Marcos, the dictator who ruled the country for two decades,
used it to instill fear, sometimes by broadcasting executions.

Just a year after the late President Ferdinand Marcos’s ouster in 1986,
the Philippines became the first country in Asia to abolish capital punishment.
The death penalty was reinstated in 1993, in response to the perception that
crime was on the rise. It was abolished again in 2006, after a sustained
campaign by a broad coalition including the Catholic Church and human rights
groups. In 2007, the Philippines ratified the Second Optional Protocol to the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, committing itself under
international law to renounce capital punishment.

President Duterte wants it back anyway. The president has reportedly

announced that he wants to put “five or six” prisoners to death every day if
capital punishment is reinstated.

And the Philippines’s previous experiences with the death penalty show
that its application has been excessive, ridden with errors and unfair to
marginalized populations.

1
 Death sentences were handed out liberally in the past. Thanks to
lobbying by the Church and others, only a few executions took place, but in
2006, when capital punishment was abolished (again), at least 1,200
individuals were on death row in the Philippines.

Background

The death penalty has been a controversial and a debatable issue for
centuries. People have been sentenced to capital punishment since the
beginning of civilization. It has been accepted as fair punishment by
governmental bodies. Over time, capital punishment has become more human
going from beheadings, to electric chairs, to now a lethal injection. The issue
with the death penalty is that some people think it is inhumane or immoral,
even unconstitutional, while others think the exact opposite and believe that
it is necessary for a well-established governmental system.

The death penalty in the Philippines can be traced back in the history
from 1848 to 1987. Noticeable reasons of its imposition in the past were to
curtail the liberties, freedoms and rights of the Filipino people.

Spanish Period (1521-1898)

Spanish colonizers brought with them are medieval Europe’s penal
system, including executions.

Capital punishment was enshrined in the 1848 Spanish Codigo

Penal Code and was only imposed on locals who challenged the
established authority of the colonizers.

American Period (1898-1934)

American colonizers, adopted most of the provisions under the
Codigo Penal Code of 1848.

The capital punishment continued to be an integral part of the

pacification process of the country, to suppress any resistance to
American authority.1

Marcos years (1965-1986)

“Deterrence” became the official justification for the imposition of
the death penalty.
This is the same justification used for the declaration of Martial
Law in 1972.

1. Retrieved from http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/news/nation/210933/imperfect-

justice-system-makes-pnoy-frown-on-death-penalty/story/ on August 21, 2017

2
 President Corazon Cojuangco-Aquino (1986-1992)
Abolished the death penalty under the 1987 Constitution.

The Ramos Administration

Reinstated the death penalty by virtue of Republic Act No. 7659
in December 1993 to address the rising criminality and incidence
of heinous crimes.

RA 7659, an act to impose the death penalty on certain heinous

crimes, amending for that purpose that revised penal laws, as
amended, other special penal laws, and for other purposes2.

President Joseph Ejercito Estrada (1998-2001)

In 1999, the bumper year for executions, the national crime
volume, instead of abating, ironically increased by 15.3 percent
or a total of 82,538 (from 71,527 crimes in the previous year).

Estrada issued a de facto moratorium on executions in the face

of church-led campaigns to abolish the death penalty and in
observance of the Jubilee year.

President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo (2001-2010)

Publicly stated that she is not in favor of executions.

Due to the rise in crimes related to drugs and kidnappings that

targeted the Filipino-Chinese community, she announced that she
would resume executions “to sow fear into the hearts of
criminals.”

Arroyo lifted the de facto moratorium issued by Estrada on

December 5, 2003. Even as executions were set to resume on
January 2004, this did not push through by virtue of a Supreme
Court decision to reopen the Lara- Licayan case.3

President Benigno Aquino III (2010-2016)

He is is not keen on reimposing capital punishment, noting that
the country's imperfect justice system may lead to the conviction
of the wrong person.

2 . Retrieved form http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/news/nation/199312/zubiri-calls-for-reimposition-of-death-

penalty/story/ on August 21, 20173

3. Congress of the Philippines, http://www.congress.gov.ph/legisdocs/basic_17/HB00001.pdf

3
 At a press conference at the Liberal Party's 65th anniversary,
Aquino said he will study emerging calls to reimpose the death
penalty, "but the essence here is our judicial system is not
perfect."

"There is a possibility that people can be wrongly convicted

especially if they do not have the ability to secure competent
counsel," Aquino said.4

The Senate Bill 2383 filed by Senator Miguel Zubiri specifically cited the
August 23 Manila hostage tragedy that killed at least eight people; the
kidnapping incident that killed a Korean pastor on the same day; the August
5 bombing of the Zamboanga airport that left two people dead; the August 6
massacre of a retired navy official and his family; and the November 2009
Maguindanao massacre where 57 people were killed.5 However, this did not
prosper.

President Rodrigo Duterte (2016- present)

The administration have found in the recent development in the
country that criminality has risen especially drug-related crimes.

Therefore, the reinstatement of death penalty is a remedy thought

of by the legislatures.

The House Bill 01 “An act imposing the death penalty on certain
heinous crimes, repealing for the purpose of RA 9346, entitled “an
Act prohibiting the death penalty in the Philippines” and Amending
Act No. 3185 as amended, otherwise known as the ‘Revised Penal
Code”, and other special laws”.6

Explanatory note of the House Bill 01 states that “there is no

denying the scourge illicit drugs have foisted upon our society,
and neither is there any denying the audacity with which
malefactors, whether under the influence or otherwise, have
perpetuated the most perverse and atrocious crimes in the most
repugnant manners”.7 This clearly shows that the intent of the
legislators in this bill is to alleviate if not eliminate the crimes
resulted from the use of illegal drugs.

4. Retrieved from: http://pcij.org/blog/2006/04/18/a-timeline-of-death-penalty-in-the-philippines on August

21, 2017, published on April 18, 2006.

5. Retrieved from http://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/1993/12/13/republic-act-no-7659/ on August 21, 2017

6. Retrieved from: http://pcij.org/blog/2006/04/18/a-timeline-of-death-penalty-in-the-philippines on August

21, 2017, published on April 18, 2006.

7. Explanatory Note, House Bill O1, http://www.congress.gov.ph/legisdocs/basic_17/HB00001.pdf

4
Analysis

Brad Adams, 
Asia Director
 of Human Rights Watch wrote to the

Congress of the Philippines to ensure that the House Bill No. 1 does not pass.
According to him, the death penalty may kill the person, but it will only
exacerbate and not solve the drug-related problems you seek to address. It
will drive the poor and vulnerable further underground, away from
interventions that seek to protect them. We urge you to instead explore
proportionate sentencing and harm reduction measures to improve the health
and safety of the Filipino community.8

Some of the reasons cited in the letter are the following:

There is no evidence of the effectiveness of the death penalty in

deterring the use, cultivation, manufacturing and trafficking of drugs—
a fact emphasized by United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime
(UNODC) data predominantly showing expanding and diversifying drug
markets in all regions of the world.9

Use of the death penalty for drug offenses is declining around the world.
It remains in routine use by only seven countries (six of which are in
Asia, the other being Saudi Arabia).10

In Singapore, despite ongoing implementation of the death penalty for

drug offenses, available data on drug use and supply trends portray an
expanding drug market, especially in relation to the supply of
methamphetamine as indicated by increasing volumes of seizures in
recent years.11

Use of the death penalty is also problematic in that the finality of

execution does not allow for any redress in the event of wrongful
execution. There is no perfect criminal justice system, and wrongful
executions resulting from human mistakes, discrimination, biases, and
abuse during the sentencing process have been documented in
jurisdictions including the United States.12

8. https://www.hrw.org/news/2016/12/02/letter-philippines-congress-death-penalty

9. https://www.unodc.org/documents/wdr2015/World_Drug_Report_2015.pdf

10.
https://www.fidh.org/IMG/pdf/asia_death_penalty_drug_crimes_fidh_wcadp_report_
oct_2015_pdf.

11. https://www.cnb.gov.sg/drugsituationreport/drugsituationreport2015_.aspx and

http://www.apaic.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=382&Itemid=813
on August 21, 2017

12. Retrieved from https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/executed-possibly-innocent

5
Wrongful Convictions and Innocence

The High Commissioner for Human Rights consistently advocates for the
universal abolition of the death penalty, under her mandate to promote and
protect the enjoyment and full realization of all human rights. In a statement
issued in 2009, the High Commissioner recalled the reasons for her opposition
to the death penalty in all circumstances, including the fundamental nature of
the right to life, the unacceptable risk of executing innocent people by
mistake, the absence of proof that the death penalty serves as a deterrent,
and the inappropriately vengeful character of the sentence (A/HRC/15/19,
paragraph 7). The panel discussed the constitutional, institutional, and
structural obstacles to the fair and accurate administration of the death
penalty. What struck many was the growing evidence in the United States of
miscarriages of justice in murder cases, including death penalty cases. While
the United States was seen as a highly developed legal system, with multiple
judicial safeguards, at both the state and federal level, these safeguards in
some instances failed to provide adequate oversight of death penalty
convictions. It was unclear to what extent some of the structural problems in
the administration of capital punishment could be remedied at all.14

Professor Samuel Gross of the University of Michigan has calculated that

2.3% of all prisoners sentenced to death between 1973 and 1989 were
exonerated and freed; the total numbers who were actually innocent is almost
certainly higher. Professor Michael Risinger of Seton Hall Law School estimates
that between 3.3% and 5% of defendants sentenced to death for murders
involving rape between 1982 and 1989 were innocent. And an initial review of
29 rape convictions with untested DNA from the files of the Virginia
Department of Forensic Science found two false convictions, or 7%. There are
over two million inmates in American jails and prisons. If as few as 1% are
innocent, that would mean we are keeping more than 20,000 innocent men
and women behind bars – and the true number may be much higher.15

13. Amnesty International 21 October 1997, Retrieved from

http://www.amnesty.org.ph/wp-
content/uploads/2016/12/Philippines_DP_Criminality_asa350091997en1.pdf

14. Moving-Away from Death Penalty, United Nations Human Rights Office of the
High Commissioner, Retrieved from
http://www.ohchr.org/Lists/MeetingsNY/Attachments/27/moving_away_from_death_penalt
y_web.pdf

15. 200 Exonerated, Too Many Wrongfully Convicted, Retrieved from

https://www.innocenceproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/ip_200.pdf

6
Top 10 Pros and Cons: Should the death penalty be allowed?16

Cons

1. Morality


2. Constitutionality

3. Deterrence

4. Retribution

5. Irrevocable Mistakes

Pros

6. Cost of Death vs. Life in Prison

7. Race

8. Closure for Victims' Families
9. Attorney Quality
10. Physicians at Execution

Death Penalty Pros and Cons in the Philippines17

PROS OF DEATH PENALTY

It daunts people to commit dreadful crimes. Criminals will get

scared of committing crimes because they will suffer such harsh
punishment. The fear of suffering will discouraged these potential
criminals to commit crimes. 
Death penalty costs the government less
compared to the costs of life imprisonment because they will be given
the expenses of food, health care and other costs that will sustain their
lives. Some critics says that spending for people who committed such
heinous crimes is impractical and just a waste of taxpayers.

Death Penalty will reduce the number of crime rate in the country
because criminals will just be taking advantage of people without harsh
punishments. 
It is what hardened criminals deserve. Criminals become
bolder and careless to commit crimes knowing that they will only be
imprisoned that are why they are not scared of repeating heinous
crimes. Thus, these types of people should be put to death to project
the majority.

16. Top 10 Pros and Cons Death Penalty, retrieved from

https://deathpenalty.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=002000
17. Death penalty pros and cons in the Philippines, March 10, 2017. Retrieved
from http://reporter.ph/death-penalty-pros-and-cons-in-the-philippines

7
 Death penalty is just punishable to drug related crimes only, which
was stated under the House Bill Number 4727. However, President
Rodrigo “Digong” Duterte wants plunder, rape to be next in line among
the heinous crimes punishable with death penalty.

CONS OF DEATH PENALTY

There are innocent people wrongly executed. Critics believed that

they keep on sending innocent people who are wrongly accused to death
row and the sad thing about this is that; innocence is proven after the
execution has been carried out. 
Critics also argue that death penalty
does not really deter criminals from committing crimes, since there are
criminals who suffer from mental illness and death sentence will not
prevent them from doing things they can no longer control without
proper medication.

Pro death penalty believed that feeding the inmates is much more
expensive than death penalty. On contrary to that, Anti- death penalty
believes that the drug used in lethal injection and other expenses related
to execution is much more costly.
Death penalty is a form of revenge.
While pro death penalty thinks that capital punishment is a form of death
retribution, Anti-death penalty also believes that to avenge a crime
committed by individual may be understandable yet killing someone is
also unconstitutional. It is also a crime that is only masked by the term
capital punishment but the reality is, it only continues the series of
violence.

People who have been involved in the process of death penalty

suffer from depression out of guilt from having to end another person’s
life. Former executioner once stated that people who participated in
executions were later destroyed, some of them turned to drugs and
alcohol to feel better.

Important Legal Provisions and Implementing Rules and Regulations

on Death Penalty:

A. 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

Article III, Section 19 paragraph (1) states “Excessive

fines shall not be imposed nor cruel, degrading or
inhuman punishment inflicted. Neither shall death
penalty be imposed nor cruel, degrading or inhuman
punishment inflicted. Neither shall death penalty be
imposed, unless, for compelling reasons involving
heinous crimes;

8
 Crimes punishable by death under this Act are heinous
for being grievous, odious and hateful offenses and
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 ordered society.18

"Art. 114. Treason of RPC. - Any Filipino citizen who

levies war against the Philippines or adheres to her
enemies giving them aid or comfort within the
Philippines or elsewhere, shall be punished by
reclusion perpetua to death and shall pay a fine not
to exceed 100,000 pesos."

No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the

testimony of two witnesses at least to the same
overt act or on confession of the accused in open
court.

Likewise, an alien, residing in the Philippines, who

commits acts of treason as defined in paragraph 1 of
this Article shall be punished by reclusion temporal
to death and shall pay a fine not to exceed 100,000
pesos."

Art. 122 of RPC. Piracy in general and mutiny on the

high seas or in Philippine waters. - The penalty of
reclusion perpetua shall be inflicted upon any person
who, on the high seas, or in Philippine waters, shall
attack or seize a vessel or, not being a member of its
complement nor a passenger, shall seize the whole
or part of the cargo of said vessel, its equipment or
passengers.
The same penalty shall be inflicted in case of mutiny on the high seas or in
Philippine waters."

18. http://www.lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1993/ra_7659_1993.html

9
 B. REPUBLIC ACT NO. 8203: AN ACT OF PROHIBITING COUNTERFEIT
DRUGS, PROVIDING PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS AND
APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFORE

The manufacture, sale, or offering for sale, donation,

distribution, trafficking, brokering, exportation, or
importation or possession of counterfeit drugs as
defined in Section 3 hereof not otherwise covered by
Republic Act No. 3720, as amended. The presence or
availability of such counterfeit drugs within the
premises of any entity engaged in the sale,
manufacture or distribution of drugs within the
premises of any entity engaged in the sale,
manufacture or distribution of drugs and/or
pharmaceutical products or in a private residence, or
in public or private vehicle, or in the premises not
covered by a valid license to operate from the Bureau,
shall constitute a prima facie evidence of violation of
this Act.

Possession of any such counterfeit drugs. However,

any person found in possession of counterfeit drugs,
in violation of this subsection, shall be exempted from
liability under the provisions of this Act.19

19.http://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/text.jsp?file_id=229058#LinkTarget_164

10
 C. REPUBLIC ACT NO. 8177: AN ACT DESIGNATING DEATH BY LETHAL
INJECTION AS THE METHOD OF CARRYING OUT CAPITAL PUNISHMENT,
AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE ARTICLE 81 OF THE REVISED PENAL
CODE, BY SECTION 24 OF REPUBLIC ACT NO. 7659

Article 81 of the Revised Penal Code states, “The

death penalty shall be executed with preference to
any other penalty and shall consist in putting the
person under the sentence to death by lethal
injection. The death sentence shall be executed under
the authority of the Director of the Bureau of
Corrections, endeavouring so far as possible to
mitigate the sufferings of the person under the
sentence during the lethal injection as well as during
the proceedings prior to the execution.

Section 2 of Republic Act No. 8177 states, “Persons

already sentenced by judgment, which has become
final and executory, who are waiting to undergo the
death penalty by electrocution or gas poisoning shall
be under the coverage of the provisions of this Act
upon its effectivity. Their sentences shall be
automatically modified for this purpose.20

THE SITUATION OF DEATH PENALTY IN OTHER COUNTRIES

A. China

Lethal injection and shooting are the only methods authorized by

China’s Criminal Procedure Law of 1996.

Shooting executions were discontinued in 2010 per a People’s

Supreme Court ruling of February 2009 which held that legal
injection is a more humane form of execution than shooting.

Lethal injection was legalized in 1996 and has been used since the
late 1990s.

China has remained as the world’s top executioner with the figure
of one thousand and six hundred thirty-four (1,634) excludes the
thousands of executions believed to have been carried out in
China.

Two of the factors apparently contributing to China’s frequent use

of the death penalty are the troubled court system and a national
policy that permits capital punishment for crimes that are not
considered capital in most other countries. Corruption,
embezzling, drug-related crimes, and even theft on a large
enough scale can all get you killed in China.21

20. http://www.lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1996/ra_8177_1996.html

21. BBC, Country Profiles: China Profile, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-

13017879, May 21, 2013

11
B. Iran

Hanging is the most common method of execution in Iran.

Hangings are often public despite a 2008 judicial moratorium on
public executions. In 2012, there were 60 confirmed public
executions. Under certain circumstances the condemned are
flogged prior to being hanged, and at least one individual has been
shot by a firing squad and then hanged.

Shooting was last used in 2008 and is not commonly used.

There are reports that stoning was used as a method of execution

in 2012 despite a 2002 and 2008 judicial moratorium on stoning.
Individuals sentenced to stoning are placed in a stoning pit, buried
to the neck or waist and others hurl stones at them until they
escape the stoning pit, are incapacitated, or are dead.22

C. Pakistan

Although other methods of execution may be legally permissible,

in practice, hanging is the only method of execution.

Reports indicate that stoning is provide for by law for some

offenses.23

D. Saudi Arabia

Sources have indicated that public beheading is probably the

common method of execution in Saudi Arabia. The condemned are
sedated prior to execution.

Public stoning can be used to execute individuals who have been

convicted of acts such as adultery.24

22. BBC, Country Profiles: Iran Profile, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-

east-14542950, May 23, 2013

23.. U.S. Dept. of State, Background Note: Pakistan,

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/3453.htm, Jul. 21, 2010.

24. U.S. Dept. of State, Background Note: Saudi Arabia,

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/3584.htm, Apr. 5, 2010

12
E. United States of America

Three states, Delaware, New Hampshire and Washington, have

authorized execution by hanging as an alternative method.
Delaware provides hanging as an alternative method of execution
for those whose offenses occurred before June 13, 1986.

All 32 non-abolitionist states, the U.S. government, and the U.S.

military provide for execution by lethal injection.

From January 2001 through February 2014, 673 of 683 executions

were carried out by lethal injection. In 2013, 38 out of 39
executions in the U.S. were performed by lethal injection, mostly
using the relatively new drug pentobarbital either by itself or in
conjunction with other drugs.

Oklahoma and Utah authorize execution by firing squad as an

alternative method. However, Utah no longer offers new death
row inmates this option as of 2004. Those still on death row who
chose it previously as their method of execution upon sentencing
can still be shot to death.

Michael A. Archuleta requested to be executed by firing squad in

early 2012, despite not being legally able to do so. He initially
chose lethal injection in 1989.

Arizona, Missouri, and Wyoming authorize execution by lethal gas

as an alternative method. Wyoming specifically provides this
method only if lethal injection were ever to be found
unconstitutional.

Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Kentucky, Oklahoma, South Carolina,

Tennessee, and Virginia authorize execution by electrocution as
an alternative method.25

25. BBC, Country Profiles: United States Profile,

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-16759230, May 23, 2013.

13
ARTICLES AND STUDIES ON DEATH PENALTY

Death penalty has a great impact on the society. According to Free

Legal Assistance Group, a local NGO, capital punishment has a
disproportionate impact on the poor. This means more than
seventy-three percent (73%) of people on death row before 2006
earned less than ten thousand pesos (PHP 10,000.00) a month.
This group of people are always vulnerable for these wrongful
convictions and they might not be able to hire competent lawyers.

Stating the reports by Amnesty International and the Commission

on Human Rights of the Philippines from the late 1990s until early
2000s, minors and the mentally handicapped are also at risk,
despite protection given and provided by the law. The reports
found that due to poor record-keeping and police procedures,
several death-row inmates had been minors at the time of their
alleged crimes. Marlon Parazo, a deaf-mute and mentally
challenged man, was sentenced to death in 1995 even though he
had not been capable of understanding the charges or the
proceedings against him. His sentence was eventually overturned
thanks to pressure from human rights groups, but there is no way
to know for sure how many other disabled prisoners have been
wrongfully convicted.

According to a study by Tom R. Tyler and Renee Weber of Law

and Society Association, death penalty support is one aspect of
general political-social ideology, rather than a response to crime-
related concerns or experiences.

A study performed by Robert L. Young of Society for the Scientific

Study of Religion, have suggested that fundamentalism,
evangelism, and devotionalism play significant but substantively
different roles in the structuring of death penalty attitudes. In
addition, the correlation of such religious variables with support
for capital punishment was found to vary by race.

Based on a project by Roy Lotz and Robert M. Regoli, data offered

minimal support for rational models of death penalty. There is a
better support for traditional values explanation. Since the
traditional values model was the best supported, it was then
subjected to a more systematic analysis by focusing on three of
its salient dimensions. These included sexual restraint, orderliness
and discipline.26

26. Sage Journals, Art. VIII, Nos. 1, 3 and 8, Psychological Studies on Death Penalty

14
 Variables, characteristics, causes and effects of death penalty have been
widely discussed all over the world. As for the Philippines, under the
administration of President Rodrigo Roa Duterte, this has started in a press
conference after he was declared winner of the May 9 presidential elections,
he said he would reintroduce capital punishment and give security forces
“shoot-to-kill” orders in his war against crime, and he will urge Congress to
restore the death penalty by hanging.

Policy Options

1. Life imprisonment without possibility of parole

Life imprisonment without possibility of parole sanction is a legal

provision that specifies that the remainder of the criminal's natural
life will be spent in prison.

Life imprisonment without possibility of parole sanction gained

popularity as people realized that a normal life sentence, even a
'natural life' sentence, does not necessarily mean that the offender
will be behind bars for life.

Life without parole also costs a lot less and allows for mistakes to
be corrected. Overall, we feel like the death penalty has a lot of
negative sides and no positive ones, and while life without parole
is not a perfect solution, it certainly beats the alternative.

2. Life imprisonment with the possibility of parole

These sentences are also sometimes called “indeterminate”

because, by definition, the trial judge cannot pre-determine the
exact time the prisoner will be released; that time is subject to
the parole process.

Other statutes specifying indeterminate sentences do not mention

a minimum term, describing the sentence simply as
“imprisonment in the state prison for life with the possibility of
parole” or “imprisonment in the state prison for life.

The authority properly may weight heavily the degree of violence

use and the amount of viciousness shown by a defendant labeling
nearly all offenses “heinous, atrocious, and cruel” and using that
as the basis for denying inmates parole. In sum, the appropriate
and governing standard of review of parole decisions for lifers is
whether there exists “some evidence” that the inmate poses a
current threat to public safety.27

27. https://oadp.org/facts/alternatives-death-penalty

15
 These life-sentence alternatives are sufficient to hold offenders
accountable and to protect society from further harm at their hands.

Recommendation

Quick reform is necessary in regards to capital punishment. Life

imprisonment must be interpreted as requiring reducibility of the sentence, in
the sense of a review which allows the authorities to consider whether any
changes in the life prisoner are so significant, and such progress towards
rehabilitation has been made in the course of the sentence, as to mean that
continued detention can no longer be justified on legitimate grounds.28

Life imprisonment with the possibility of parole gives the offenders

accountability to what they have committed. This also protects the society at
large from further harm from their hands. However, having the chance for a
parole, which should be determined by a trial judge, gives these offenders he
chance to make up for mistakes and build their new lives.

Conclusion

Executions kill people. Isn’t it very hypocritical for us as a society to

punish people for killing by killing them, especially when there are more
humane methods of dealing with them? And what if the person we are
punishing has actually done nothing wrong? There are numerous cases where
people who were executed were found to have been innocent all along soon
afterwards.

Government policies, legislation and provisions have contributed in

Philippine history to a growing number of offenders serving very long terms
in prison. Long prison terms are a major cause of increased imprisonment
rates, often in conditions that are inhuman and degrading, but increasingly
harsh sentences are a far less effective deterrent to would-be offenders than
increasing the likelihood that they will be detected and caught. Furthermore,
the steady increase in the number of life and long-term prisoners makes it
harder to conduct individual assessments of their needs, rather than general
presumptions based on the type of sentence they are serving.

Life and long-term prisoners are often subjected to worse conditions and
treatment than other prisoners. The conditions are often highly restrictive and
damaging to physical and mental health, with no effort or willingness to invest
in rehabilitation or to consider alternative sanctions or early release. The
length of their sentences can mean that prison authorities do not see the value
in providing rehabilitative programmes for life or long-term prisoners, as it will
be many years or decades before they are released, if at all.

28. https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/life-without-parole

16
 However, such attitudes ignore the fact that keeping people in prison
for years with no meaningful activity will make it harder for them to
reintegrate or benefit from such programmes at a late stage of their sentence.
It also risks damaging the mental health and wellbeing of the prisoner. Being
sentenced to prison is punishment in itself: the conditions of imprisonment
and the treatment received in prison must not amount to further punishment.

It is best if the State will provide them meaningful activities during their
imprisonment. Activities which do not give condemnation to them, but
betterment of their physical, mental and spiritual beings and needs.

We are one, we all belong in one state. When this state kills, we are
participants. Would you choose to be a participant of turning on the switch
that snuffs out human life?

17
 Death Penalty on Society

earnings of PHP 35, 001 up earnings of PHP 20,001-35,000

earnings of PHP 10,001-20,000 earnings of PHP 10,000 below

Table 1. Earnings of People Convicted of Death Penalty

Free legal assistance group has shown that 73% of the offenders receive
earnings of PHP 10,000 below. These people are shown to be vulnerable for
wrong convictions.

Death Penalty on Minors

250%

200%

150%

100%

50%

0%

15-19 years old 20-25 years old 26-30 years old

Table 2. Conviction Percentage on Minors

18
 The reports found that due to poor record-keeping and police
procedures, several death-row inmates, an equal of 65% had been minors at
the time of their alleged crimes.

19