Death Penalty: A Deterrent to Crime?

The debate on death penalty rages in the social consciousness of the Filipino people.

The abduction and death of Coca-cola executive Betti Chua Sy in the hands of her kidnappers last November 2003 became the proverbial “straw that broke the camel’s back.” It galvanized advocates of death penalty to pressure the GMA government to lift the moratorium on capital punishment which was suspended by former President Estrada in March 2000.

Proponents of death penalty believe that capital punishment is based on retributive justice. Adherents also argue that death penalty will curb the upsurge of criminality and the growing deterioration of peace and order in the country

Death Penalty in the Philippines

Human Rights Network on the Web (www.hrnow.org) published an online document detailing an overview of death penalty in the Philippines citing that capital punishment was first advocated in the country in 1932. The original capital offenses listed in the Revised Penal Code that are punishable by death were seven: treason, piracy, parricide, murder, kidnapping, rape, and robbery with homicide. After World II, anti-subversion law was added as a capital offense to curtail the imminent threat of communist insurgency. Capital offenses punishable by death added up to 24 during the Marcos regime.

There were 67 prisoners executed from 1933 to 1976. Nineteen of the executions were done during the Marcos administration prior to martial law. At the time of martial law, 12 individuals were executed.

Death penalty was abolished in 1987, with the ratification of the new constitution. The Philippines was the first Asian country to do so.

However, only a year after its promulgation, moves to reinstate capital punishment were initiated by some members of Congress. Anti-crime groups, including Volunteers Against Crime and Corruption (VACC), lobbied for is restoration, citing the upsurge of criminality and deteriorating peace and order in the country. The general perception of lawlessness was heightened by coup attempts launched by a faction of the military during the Aquino administration, and high profile cases such as the Vizconde Massacre and Sarmenta rape slay.

Capital punishment was reinstated seven years after its abolition through Republic Act 7659, which extended offenses punishable by death to a total of 46. Twenty-five of these heinous crimes “are considered mandatory death offenses that while 21 are death eligible offenses, ranging from Reclusion perpetua to death.”

“Mandatory death offenses include qualified robbery, eleven (11) kinds of rape, 12 drug-related offenses, two (2) forms of kidnapping, and destructive arson,. Death eligible offenses comprise treason, qualified piracy, destructive arson, plunder, eight (8) drug-related offenses and carnapping with homicide.”

Seven executions were carried out under RA 7659, during the time of former President Estrada. In March 2000, however, the former President announced the suspension of execution in observance of Jubilee Year. The Church and anti-death penalty groups lauded the decision.

Meanwhile, the increasing number of kidnap for ransom cases that targeted the Chinese community has taken a toll to an already weakened economy. The death of Betti Chua Sy moved the Filipino Chinese and business community to call for the restoration of death penalty.

The deterrence argument

President Arroyo, in an apparent gesture to win the support of the Chinese community changed her previous position on capital punishment by lifting the moratorium on death penalty. She justified her decision, announcing that capital punishment is a necessary measure to “strike fear into the hearts of criminals”.

A source from the Chinese community who does not want his name mentioned, said that the Chinese community is strongly supportive of the President’s pronouncement. He for one is a strong adherent of death penalty. He has relatives and friends who fell victims to kidnap for ransom gangs. With capital punishment enforced, there is a feeling of security in the community, knowing that lawless elements will think twice before committing any crime. “But it is still too early to say, if it will diminish commission of heinous crimes,” he admits.

The business community also praised the President’s decision. In an interview done by Philippine Star last December 11, 2003, Francis Chua of the Chamber of Commerce of the Philippines Foundation said it is very important that there is certainty of punishment for heinous crimes. But Makati Business Club executive director Guillermo Luz, (in the same interview done by the Philippine Star) emphasized, that more than death penalty, (effective) law enforcement is the best deterrent against crime.

In an interview done by the author, Mr. Sergio Ortiz-Luis Jr. of Export Bank contends that the problem of peace and order in the country today emanates from the government’s inability to enforce the law “that death penalty is needed.” When asked if he believes that death penalty is the correct solution to stop the commission of heinous crimes, he replied: “It may not be ‘the’ solution but is certainly among the correct solutions.”

Church groups and human rights advocates criticized the President’s decision, claiming politics behind the lifting of moratorium. Death penalty, according to Catholic Bishops Conference (CBCP) does not render retributive justice because “rather than vindicating rights, it seems to satisfy only the spirit of vengeance or revenge, thus perpetuating the cycle of violence” (CFC, art. 1041). Capital punishment is also inhumane and deprives the criminal the chance to reform. Furthermore, there has never been any conclusive proof that death penalty is a deterrent to crime. Amnesty International cites in its website a survey conducted for the United Nations in 1998 and updated in 2002 which concludes that “it is not prudent to accept the hypothesis that capital punishment deters murder to a marginally greater extent than does the threat and application of the supposedly lesser punishment of life imprisonment.”

Amnesty International also mentions in its website that countries which abolished the death penalty did not have an increase in crime rates after the abolition. It mentions Canada as an example. The country had a crime rate of 3.09% per 100,000 population in 1975, the year before capital punishment was abolished, Twenty-six later, in 2002, the homicide rate was down to 1.85% per 100,000 population, 40% lower than 1975.

Profile of Death Row inmates

Based on an online article (www.philsol.nl/) written by Santos Lamban of Philippine Alliance of Human Rights Advocates in March 2000, 12 criminals were convicted of death, a year after RA 7659 was signed into law in 1993. The number of convictions saw a steady increase every year. In 1995, the number went up to 104. The following year, it increased to 182. The number tripled to 520 in 1997. By the end of 1999, the number of convicts at the National Bilibid Prison and Correctional Institute for Women reached a total of 956.

The latest survey done by Free Legal Assistance Group (FLAG), last February 18, 2004, shows death row population has gone up to a total of 1,031. Twenty-eight are women, while 1,003 are men.

According to a profile prepared by FLAG, 300 of death row inmates were either farmers or fishermen. One hundred fifty-two (152) worked in the transport sector as drivers, mechanics, etc. One hundred six (106) were construction workers, 72 were law enforcers. There are 16 death inmates who were students prior to their arrest. Fifteen (15) inmates were unemployed at the time of their arrest, while 86 inmates have no data of prior employment. The profile also shows that 40 of those in death row are illiterate, 346 are elementary level while 74 are elementary graduates. There are only 54 death inmates who are college graduates.

At present, 178 inmates are awaiting execution, their cases having been affirmed by the Supreme Court. The rest are still waiting for the final decision of their cases by the Supreme Court.

Biased against the poor

It is perhaps significant to indicate that a great majority of death row inmates are poor and uneducated. This fact seems to give credence to what US Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall said on the issue of death penalty. “The burden of capital punishment falls upon the poor, the ignorant and the underprivileged of society.”

Santos Lamban of Philippine Alliance of Human Rights wrote in an online article (www.philsol.nl) that death penalty “is biased against the poor and the marginalized (as) can be seen in the socio-economic profile of the convicts.”

“Everybody in death row is poor,” Noel said. Convicted for multiple murder, Noel is only 35 years old, and had been in death row for eight years. He had been scheduled four times for execution, but had been postponed each time. “You will not see any Chinese here. There are Chinese and rich people who have been sentenced with death penalty but their cases have never been affirmed by the Supreme Court,” Noel said.

According to Noel there are around 500 convicts who have violated the dangerous drug act (which is punishable by death). But their cases have never reached finality. He hasten to clarify that “I don’t mean they should be meted with death penalty but it only shows that death penalty become the lot of the poor. That’s the way I look at it,” Noel concluded.

Since majority of the inmates came from poor families that cannot afford to hire private lawyers there is always the likelihood they will be convicted of their crime.

“That’s what happened if you can’t afford a good lawyer”, said Ruben. The 39-year old inmate was sentenced to death for kidnapping and has been in death row for nine years. He could have been acquitted had his case been reviewed properly, according to him. Since he was poor and cannot afford a private lawyer, he was convicted, while two others accused of the same crime were acquitted.

Human rights advocates such as Coalition Against Death Penalty (formed upon the initiative of the Catholic Church), Philippine Alliance of Human Rights Advocates and FLAG intensify their campaign to have the death penalty abolished. CADP and PAHRA lobby with legislators and conduct education drives regarding the issue. FLAG gives paralegal assistance to inmates and their families. Noel is one of those given paralegal training by FLAG. In turn, he helps his illiterate co-inmates by writing letters for them.

Loopholes in the Justice system

Human justice is fallible. There is always the possibility that an innocent person can be convicted of a crime he did not commit. However, such mistake can still be corrected if the person is serving only a life sentence. Not so, if the person is sent to die.

If Ruben is to be believed, the execution of Jesus Morallos who was sent to die by lethal injection in 1999 was an ultimate miscarriage of justice. Jesus was Ruben’s cellmate since 1996. Ruben claimed Jesus was innocent of the crime he was convicted of. “He just arrived from the province”, according to Ruben, “and happened to be with his cousin when the cousin was arrested by the police.” By sentencing him to die, “he also became a victim and his family as well.”

“Our justice system has many loopholes,” according to SPO4 Nenita Abañes of Marikina Police Station, confirming what has already been perceived by many as imperfections in the system. “If a person is poor, the implementation of the law is done to the full extent.” But just the same, SPO4 Abañes justifies death penalty as a deterrent to crime, although on a case to case basis. “Men who rape their daughters should be meted with death penalty,” said SPO4 Abañes.

Church’s stand

The Philippine hierarchy has consistently opposed death penalty. CBCP took a firm stand against it in 1979, attended committee hearings when Parliamentary Bill No. 543 entitled An Act Abolishing Death Penalty, was introduced in Congress. Again, in 1992, the CBCP reiterated its stand against capital punishment in the midst of discussions for its restoration. The Bishops said in a statement that “the abolition of the death penalty is consistent with our stand for life, which we want to be protected and enhanced from conception to its natural end.”

The Church espouses the standpoint that criminals should be given the chance to reform and be rehabilitated. Echoing the words of Pope John Paul II, CBCP president Archbishop Capalla, said: “The person who is a criminal does not become a monster. There is an inherent good in one that does not disappear with his criminal act. Therefore he can be a new person.”

“Criminals will not be eradicated by death but by a lifetime in jail where they have a chance to reform,” Archbishop Rosales said.

Religious formation

The inmates receive religious formation from catechists, religious sisters and seminarians who visit them regularly.

“We have regular classes in Mariology and Christology,” said Noel.

Ruben serves at mass and leads various religious activities inside the prison. “I have become closer to God,” he said. He still hopes that his sentence will be commuted.

Noel believes crime offenders should be punished to reform and not sent to die. “If a person committed a crime, it is possible that in that particular time he was not in his right mind. He was far from God. So the right thing to do is to reform the criminal. Lock him up in jail and help him spiritually. I’m very sure he will reform eventually because of the hardship of life in prison.”

Msgr. Roberto Olaguer, the prison chaplain, not only looks after the inmates’ spiritual needs, he takes up their cause as well.

Speaking of Roberto Lara and Roderick Licayan whose case was recently remanded to the lower court, Ruben said: “It’s good Msgr. Olaguer is around to help them, and the PAO (Public Attorney’s Office) took up their case. Otherwise, they would have been executed already.”

Lara and Licayan were scheduled for execution last January 30 of this year, but the Supreme Court granted a stay of the execution when two suspects were arrested and cleared Lara of involvement in the kidnapping of Tomas Co and Linda Manaysay in 1998.

“What happened to Roberto Lara and Roderick Licayan is a clear example of an inefficient justice system,” Msgr. Olaguer said. The priest pointed out the failure of the trial court to acknowledge witnesses and evidences that could have proved Lara’s innocence early on. Licayan on his part is not exactly innocent of the crime committed, but he did not also deserve a death sentence considering his minor role as an accomplice in the crime.

“There are severe imperfections in the justice system which could likely result in a situation where innocent victim might be executed (as) can be seen in the review of cases by the Supreme Court,” Santos Lamban said. (www.philsol.nl)

The debate continues

The government, supported by proponents of death penalty, remains steadfast in its position to go on with executions.

Mr. Ortiz-Luis, acknowledging that our justice system is not perfect, justifies his stand saying, “...at the end, the common good is attained by enforcing it.” My source from the Chinese community believes that “death penalty should remain to stop kidnapping and other drug related crimes.” For those who oppose death penalty he has only this to say, “How would they feel if it is members of their family who are kidnapped or raped? “

Anti-death penalty groups, on the other hand, continue to educate people on its inhumane character, and lobby for its abolition.

In Congress, support for the abolition of death penalty is gaining ground. A June 25, 2003 document from the website of Human Rights Network (www.hrnow.org) states that 109 House members and 15 Senators have expressed their support for the abolition of capital punishment.

The imposition of death penalty as a deterrent to crime is a “barbaric penal practice that no longer befits the modern times,” according to Senator Aquilino Pimentel. There is now a pending bill at the Senate authored by the Senator which calls for the “abolition of death penalty and put in its place a penalty of 30 years of imprisonment without possibility of parole.”

The death row inmates, meanwhile, live one day at a time. Guilty or not, they have learned to accept their lot and leave their fate in the hands of God.