Anti pro free essay sample

PRO: In Senate Bill 2080, Sotto cited the â€Å"influx of heinous crimes in the country nowadays† and the â€Å"indiscriminate and horrendouse brutality happening everywhere† to justify the reinstatement of death penalty. Sotto said the imposition of life imprisonment was a â€Å"non-deterrent against criminality. † His measure is particularly pushing for the revival of death by lethal injection for those found guilty of heinous crimes. When asked on Tuesday if his proposed law will conflict with his pro-life stance, Sotto texted, â€Å"Nope. Thats different. I am pro-life for the unborn and the Filipino family. I am pro-death to heinous criminals. † â€Å"Ang layo, di ba? Im not pro-life for heinous criminals? † he added. In 2006, then-President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo approved the commutation to life imprisonment of death row convicts, and eventually signed a law abolishing the death penalty. Sotto was among the senators who staunchly opposed the RH Law, which was enacted in December 2012. The implementation of the RH Law, however, was halted by the Supreme Court pending legal questions on the legislation. Flawed justice system Meanwhile, in Malacanang, Presidential Communications Operations Office head Herminio Coloma Jr. reiterated that President Benigno Aquino III has yet to tackle the issue with his Cabinet. â€Å"Hihintayin na lang po natin iyong panukalang iyan dahil hindi pa naman ito napapagpasyahan o hindi pa naman ito tinatalakay o inilalahad sa Gabinete. Hintayin na lang po natin ang panukala hinggil diyan,† Coloma said at a press briefing. Coloma admitted that one of the Presidents reservations was regarding the weak justice system in the country. â€Å"If the justice system is flawed, delikado iyong mga mapaparusahan na inosente, di ba? Iyon iyong isa sa mga concerns,† he said, adding that reforms are still ongoing. In the meantime, Coloma said law enforcers remain vigilant against criminal elements. â€Å"Lahat ng paglabag sa batas ay siniseryoso ng ating pamahalaan dahil ito ay hindi katanggap-tanggap,† he said, adding crime prevention is best achieved through community efforts. — with Kimberly Jane Tan/KBK, GMA News senate Deputy Minority Leader Vicente Sotto III on Tuesday disputed the claim of critics that the death penalty will not prevent or reduce the commission of heinous crimes, and that its revival favors the rich. In an interview, Sotto, a pro-life solon, cited what he called compelling reasons for reviewing the death penalty under Senate Bill No. 2080, seeking to repeal Republic Act No. 9346. The latter is also known as â€Å"An Act prohibiting the imposition of Death Penalty in the Philippines. † Sotto recalled how, in the 9th or 10th Congress â€Å"we were very successful in imposing the death penalty for compelling reasons, and there were compelling reasons during that time. Now, there are also compelling reasons [because of the alarming frequency and gravity of] heinous crimes,† Sotto said. Sotto cited the recent case of a 6-year-old girl in Malate, Manila who was raped and killed by a drug addict. â€Å"Well, the marijuana addict last week who raped and killed a 6-year-old girl [gave the excuse that he was high on marijuana]. † â€Å"Is that an excuse? It is not an excuse. Voluntary intoxication is not an excuse; it can never be an excuse. Whether marijuana, shabu or whatever. Then I’ll go back to the cause, the drug trafficking issue. The big-time drug traffickers should be meted out the death penalty,† he said. Sotto argued that life imprisonment does not deter the commission of heinous and other drug-related cases but with death penalty, there is a big chance of checking these. â€Å"If you look it up in the dictionary, the meaning of death means also to inhibit. When you remove a criminal from the face of the earth you inhibit him from doing the same again,† Sotto said, inviting attention to the â€Å"record of the Department of Justice, under whose watch so many people have fled the country. † It took 10 years for drug trafficking to again surface in the country after the Marcos administration sentenced Lim Seng by firing squad for drugs. â€Å"The proposal is not to deter but to prevent them from doing it again, and also [to instill fear in criminals]; and remember the record will speak for itself, when Lim Seng was shot, meted the death penalty by firing squad it almost took 10 years before drug trafficking started again in the Philippines,† Sotto said. Sotto also rejected the arguments by some critics that imposition of death penalty violates the Constitution, and this was the reason Congress repealed the law. â€Å"That was in the Constitution, but the Constitution provided that we (Congress) may impose the re-imposition of the death penalty for compelling reasons and we cited the compelling reasons during that time and the compelling reasons are the heinous crimes that being committed,† he said. ANTI: No room for death penalty: Bringing back the death penalty will do more harm in the countrys far-from-perfect criminal justice system, said Department of Justice (DOJ) Secretary Leila de Lima Thursday, January 30. In an interview with reporters, De Lima said the harms of a false conviction increase and become irreparable with capital punishment given the irreversible nature of death. Ang death penalty kasi irreversible na yan. Once imposed, hindi mo na pwedeng mabawi yan. And then ang criminal justice, alam naman natin lahat yan, marami pang flaws. So, paano kung ngakakamali tayo sa mga hinahatulan? she explained. (The death penalty is irreversible. Once imposed, you cant overturn it. And then, as we all know, our criminal justice system still has a lot flaws. So, what if we falsely convict [criminal suspects]? ) The debate on death penalty resurfaced after Senator Vicente Tito Sotto sought for its revival in Congress. The senator, citing recent spike in serious crimes, challenged the effectiveness of life imprisonment in deterring criminals. Life imprisonment or reclusion perpetua is currently the maximum penalty imposed upon convicted state criminals. The Republic Act (RA) 7659 or the Death Penalty Law was abolished in 1986 during the term of Former President Corazon Aquino, mother of incumbent President Benigno Aquino III. It was reintroduced by former President Fidel V Ramos in 1993, but was suspended again in 2006 under former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. Knee-jerk reaction De Lima regards Sottos proposal as a band-aid solution to criminal activity. Sa tingin ko diyan, with all due respect to Senator Sotto, baka na naman knee-jerk reaction naman yan noh on eto na namang spate of mga drug raids, dahil mainit nga yung usapin ng presence ng foreign drug elements or sinasabing mga cartel within the country, she said. (What I think is, with all due respect to Senator Sotto, that might be a knee-jerk reaction to the spate of drug raids [by anti-drug state operatives], because of the controversy on the presence of foreign drug elements or the so-called cartel within the country. ) De Lima added that the best deterrent to crimes is the certainty of prosecution and punishment. Retrogression The justice secretary said the element of deterrence is present anyway in the current penal system, making death penalty unnecessary. Her stand echoed a previous statement from President Aquino: As for deterrence, I dont think thats the only solution for deterrence. She added that the proposed revival of RA 7659 is a step backwards for the Philippines, citing the countrys compliance with international commitments. We will be reneging from our treaty commitments. Signatory tayo sa (We are a signatory to the) protocol the ICCPR or the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights The Philippines undertook, as a signatory not to impose death penalty It would be a retrogression ng sistema natin(of our system), she explained. – Rappler. com 10 Reasons to Oppose the Death Penalty Innocence and the Death Penalty The wrongful execution of an innocent person is an injustice that can never be rectified. Since the reinstatement of the death penalty, 142 men and women have been released from death row nationally. The High Cost of the Death Penalty It costs far more to execute a person than to keep him or her in prison for life. Death Penalty Can Prolong Suffering for Victims Families Many family members who have lost love ones to murder feel that the death penalty will not heal their wounds nor will it end their pain; the extended legal process prior to executions can prolong the agony experienced by the victims families. International Views on the Death Penalty The vast majority of countries in Western Europe, North America and South America more than 139 nations worldwide have abandoned capital punishment in law or in practice. Inadequate Legal Representation Perhaps the most important factor in determining whether a defendant will receive the death penalty is the quality of the representation he or she is provided. Deterrence Scientific studies have consistently failed to demonstrate that executions deter people from committing crime anymore than long prison sentences. Arbitrariness in the Application of the Death Penalty Politics, quality of legal counsel and the jurisdiction where a crime is committed are more often the determining factors in a death penalty case than the facts of the crime itself. Religious Perspectives on the Death Penalty Although isolated passages of religious scripture have been quoted in support of the death penalty, almost all religious groups in the United States regard executions as immoral. Racial Disparities The race of the victim and the race of the defendant in capital cases are major factors in determining who is sentenced to die in this country. In 1990 a report from the General Accounting Office concluded that in 82 percent of the studies [reviewed], race of the victim was found to influence the likelihood of being charged with capital murder or receiving the death penalty, i. e. those who murdered whites were more likely to be sentenced to death than those who murdered blacks. Alternatives to the Death Penalty In every state that retains the death penalty, jurors have the option of sentencing convicted capital murderers to life in prison without the possibility of parole. The sentence is cheaper to tax-payers and keeps violent offenders off the streets for good.