Wednesday, July 17, 2019

History of Death Penalty in the Philippines Essay

The history of the conclusion punishment was extensively discussed by the authoritative Court in mess vs. Echegaray.1 As early 1886, with child(p) punishment had entered the Philippine legal arranging through the grey-haired penal Code, which was a modified version of the Spanish punishable Code of 1870. The Revised penal Code, which was oblige on 1 January 1932, provided for the terminal penalization in specified crimes under specific circumstances. Under the Revised penal Code, closing is the penalisation for the crimes of t background, correspondence with the enemy during multiplication of war, qualified piracy, parricide, murder, infanticide, kidnapping, misdemeanour with homicide or with the engagement of deadly weapon or by two or much persons egressing in insanity, robbery with homicide, and arson resulting in finis. The inclination of capital offenses lengthened as the general assembly responded to the emergencies of the times.In 1941, Commonwealth m ove (C.A.) nary(prenominal) 616 added espionage to the list. In the 1950s, at the height of the Huk confusion, the organization enacted Republic scrap (R.A.) zero(prenominal) 1700, other known as the Anti-Subversion Law, which carried the demolition penalization for leaders of the rebellion. From 1971 to 1972, more capital offenses were created by more laws, among them, the Anti-Hijacking Law, the Dangerous Drugs Act, and the Anti-Carnapping Law. During martial law, presidential Decree (P.D.) No. 1866 was enacted penalizing with wipeout, among others, crimes involving homicide affiliated with an unlicensed firearm. In the aftermath of the 1986 revolution that dismantle the Marcos regime and led to the nullification of the 1973 Constitution, a new constitution was drafted and ratified.The 1987 Constitution provides in Article III, variance 19 (1) that profuse fines sh alone not be impose, nor cruel, contaminating or inhuman punishment inflicted. neither shall expirat ion penalisation be imposed, unless, for stimulate reasons involving flagitious crimes, the relation hereafter provides for it. both finale penalty already imposed shall be reduced to reclusion perpetua. Congress passed Republic Act No. 7659 (en surnamed An Act to Impose the termination penalization on Certain heinous Crimes, Amending for that Purpose the Revised penal Code, as Amended, other Special Penal Laws, and for Other Purposes), which took effect on 31 celestial latitude 1993. editIllustrative crusadesAs a result of the abolition of the remnant penalty, existing penalties for death were reduced to reclusion perpetua, within the orifice of tidings. here(predicate) are illustrative cases The case of People of the Philippines vs. Quiachon3 involves an accused who screw upd his 8-year old daughter, a deaf-mute. Under Article 266-B of the Revised Penal Code, the imposable penalty should shake off been death. With the abolition of the finis Penalty, however, the penalty was reduced to reclusion perpetua, without the surmise of liberate under the Indeterminate fourth dimension Law. The case of People of the Philippines vs. Santos4 involves the rape of a 5-year old child.The accused was meted the penalty of death because rape committed against a child under seven (7) years old is a dastardly and repulsive crime which merits no less than the fraud of capital punishment under Article 266-B of the Revised Penal Code. The sentence was also reduced to reclusion perpetua, without the possibility of parole. The case of People vs. Salome5 involves a rape of a 13-year old girl (who got pregnant), committed in a dwelling and with the instigate of a bladed weapon. The imposable penalty should have been death, but with the abolition of the Death Penalty, the Supreme Court reduced the penalty toreclusion perpetua, without the possibility of parole.The case of People of the Philippines vs. Tubongbanua6 involves the murder of a victim who suffered 18 stab wounds which were all directed to her chest, heart and lungs. Considering the existence of the loss circumstance of evident premeditation and the aggravate circumstances of dwelling, and taking advantage of maestro strength without any mitigating circumstance, the proper imposable penalty would have been death. However, with the abolition of the death penalty law, the penalty imposed was reclusion perpetua, without the possibility ofparole. http// Excessive fines shall not be imposed, nor cruel, degrading or inhuman punishment inflicted. Neither shall death penalty be imposed, unless, for compelling reasons involving heinous crimes, the Congress hereafter provides for it. Any death penalty already imposed shall be reduced to reclusion perpetua. In mid-1987, a bill to seeking to reinstate the death penalty for 15 heinous crimes including murder, rebellion and the import or sale of require drugs was submitted in Congress. 1988In 1988, the military started lobbying for the imposition of the death penalty. Then Armed Forces of the Philippines primary(prenominal) General Fidel Ramos was prominent among those calling for the reintroduction of the death penalty for rebellion, murder and drug-trafficking. The military thrust for the restoration of the capital punishment was in the beginning against the CPP-NPA, whose offensives then included urban blackwash campaigns. Anti-death penalty groups including Amnesty International contradictory the bill, but the House of Representatives voted for restoration by 130 votes to 25. 1989Three similar bills were gravel forwards the Senate. After a bally(a) 1989 coup, President Aquino certified as imperative one of these bills on the prompting of Ramos. The give tongue to bill again proposed death penalty for rebellion, as well as for sedition, subversive activity and insurrection. 1990Ramos memorial tabletA series of naughty profile crimes during this per iod, including the murder of Eileen Sarmenta and Allan Gomez, created public mould that heinous crimes were on the rise. The Ramos administration succeeded in restoring death penalty. 1992President Fidel Ramos during his first of all fix of the Nation address declared that his administration would regard the restoration of the death penalty a legislative priority, and urged Congress to set out speedy action. 1993Republic Act No. 8177, which mandates that a death sentence shall be carried out through fatal injection, was sanctioned on March 20, 1996. Estrada administration 7 death convicts were execute during the Estrada administration before he proclaimed a moratorium on carrying into actions. 1999 Leo Echegaray, 38, was executed by lethal injection on February 5, 1999. He was the first to be executed after the Philippines restored death penalty. It was the Philippines first execution in 22 years. half dozen more men followed within the next 11 months.2000On March 24, 2000, Estrada imposed a de facto moratorium in observance of the Christian Jubilee Year. He also granted 108 Executive Clemencies to death convicts.On December 10, 2000, Human Rights Day, Estrada announced that he would commute sentences of all death convicts to look imprisonment. He expressed his proneness to certify as urgent a bill seeking a set aside of the Death Penalty Law.Arroyo administration enjoy see Gloria Arroyo on death penaltya timelineWhile the Arroyo administration has been characterized by a flip-flopping stand on death penalty, no death convict has been executed under her watch. Voting separately, the two Houses of Congress on June 6, 2006 repealed the death penalty law. Arroyo gestural Republic Act 9346 on June 24, 2006.Section 1. The imposition of the penalty of death is herewith prohibited. Accordingly, Republic Act No. viii Thousand One Hundred lxxvii (R.A. No. 8177), other known as the Act Designating Death by fatal Injection is hereby repealed. Republic Act N o. Seven Thousand Six Hundred Fifty-Nine (R.A. No. 7659), other known as the Death Penalty Law, and all other laws, executive orders and decrees, to that degree as they impose the death penalty are hereby repealed or amend accordingly.Sec. 2. In lieu of the death penalty, the interest shall be imposed.(a) the penalty of reclusion perpetua, when the law violated poses use of the nomenclature of the penalties of the Revised Penal Code or (b) the penalty of life imprisonment, when the law violated does not make use of the nomenclature of the penalties of the Revised Penal Code. Sec. 3. Person convicted of offenses punished with reclusion perpetua, or whose sentences give be reduced to reclusion perpetua, by reason of this Act, shall not be eligible for parole under Act No. 4180, otherwise known as the IndeterminateSentence Law, as amended.

No comments:

Post a Comment