History of Death Penalty in the Philippines Essay

The history of the close punishment was extensively discussed by the commanding Court in People vs. Echegaray.1 As early 1886, crownwork punishment had entered the Filipino legal system through the old penal Code, which was a modified version of the Spanish penal Code of 1870. The Revised penal Code, which was enforced on 1 January 1932, provided for the oddment penalisation in qualify crimes under specific circumstances. Under the Revised Penal Code, terminal is the punishment for the crimes of treason, correspondence with the enemy during times of war, qualified piracy, parricide, murder, infanticide, kidnapping, rape with homicide or with the custom of deadly weapon or by two or much persons resulting in insanity, robbery with homicide, and arson resulting in stopping point. The list of capital offenses prolonged as the legislature responded to the emergencies of the times.In 1941, Commonwealth motion (C.A.) no 616 added espionage to the list. In the 1950s, at th e height of the Huk rebellion, the government enacted state practise (R.A.) No. 1700, other known as the Anti-Subversion Law, which carried the destruction penalisation for leaders of the rebellion. From 1971 to 1972, to a greater extent capital offenses were created by more polices, 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 remnant, among others, crimes involving homicide committed with an unlicensed firearm. In the aftermath of the 1986 revolution that dismantled the Marcos government activity and led to the nullification of the 1973 Constitution, a new constitution was drafted and ratified.The 1987 Constitution provides in expression III, Section 19 (1) that Excessive fines sh in all not be enforce, nor cruel, degrade or inhuman punishment inflicted. Neither shall death penalty be imposed, un little, for compelling reasons involving wick ed crimes, the Congress hereafter provides for it. Any death penalty already imposed shall be reduced to reclusion perpetua. Congress passed democracy Act No. 7659 (entitled An Act to Impose the Death Penalty on certain(prenominal) Heinous Crimes, Amending for that Purpose the Revised Penal Code, as Amended, Other additional Penal Laws, and for Other Purposes), which took effect on 31 December 1993. editexemplifying boldnesssAs a result of the abolition of the death penalty, existing penalties for death were reduced to reclusion perpetua, within the mishap of parole. Here are illustrative disciplines The case of People of the Philippines vs. Quiachon3 involves an accused who raped his 8-year old daughter, a deaf-mute. Under Article 266-B of the Revised Penal Code, the imposable penalty should have been death. With the abolition of the Death Penalty, however, the penalty was reduced to reclusion perpetua, with break through the possibility of parole under the Indeterminate Sent ence 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 below seven (7) eld old is a dastardly and repulsive crime which merits no less than the imposition 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 aid of a bladed weapon. The imposable penalty should have been death, entirely 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 thrust wounds which were all directed to her chest, heart and lungs. Considering the existence of the qualifying circumstance of evident premeditation and the aggravating circumstances of dwelling, and taking advantage of superior metier 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//phbar.org/wikilaw/index.php?title=Death_Penalty_Law(1) Excessive fines shall not be imposed, nor cruel, degrading or inhuman punishment inflicted. Neither shall death penalty be imposed, unless, for compelling reasons involving flagitious 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 prohibited drugs was submitted in Congress. 1988In 1988, the military started lobbying for the imposition of the death penalty. Then Armed For ces of the Philippines Chief general Fidel Ramos was prominent among those calling for the reintroduction of the death penalty for rebellion, murder and drug-trafficking. The military causa for the restoration of the capital punishment was primarily against the CPP-NPA, whose offensives then included urban assassination campaigns. Anti-death penalty groups including Amnesty International opposed the bill, but the shack of Representatives voted for restoration by 130 votes to 25. 1989Three similar bills were put out front the Senate. After a bloody 1989 coup, President Aquino certified as imperative one of these bills on the prompting of Ramos. The said bill again proposed death penalty for rebellion, as well as for sedition, subversion and insurrection. 1990Ramos administrationA series of high profile crimes during this period, including the murder of Eileen Sarmenta and Allan Gomez, created public impression that heinous crimes were on the rise. The Ramos administration succeed ed in restoring death penalty. 1992President Fidel Ramos during his first dry land of the Nation address declared that his administration would regard the restoration of the death penalty a legislative priority, and urged Congress to take speedy action. 1993Republic Act No. 8177, which mandates that a death sentence shall be carried out through lethal injection, was approved on March 20, 1996. Estrada administration septette death convicts were kill during the Estrada administration before he announced a moratorium on executions. 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. Six 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 minded(p) 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 life imprisonment. He expressed his passion to certify as urgent a bill seeking a repeal of the Death Penalty Law.Arroyo administrationPlease 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 signed Republic Act 9346 on June 24, 2006.Section 1. The imposition of the penalty of death is hereby prohibited. Accordingly, Republic Act No. Eight honey oil One Hundred Seventy-Seven (R.A. No. 8177), otherwise known as the Act Designating Death by Lethal Injection is hereby repealed. Republic Act No. Seven Thousand Six Hundred cardinal (R.A. No. 7659), otherwise known as the Death Penalty Law, and all other laws, executive orders and decrees, insofar as they impose the death penalty are hereby repealed or amended accordingly.Sec. 2. In lieu of the death penalty, the following shall be imposed.(a) the penalty of reclusion perpetua, when the law violated makes use of the lyric 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 will 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.