death penalty essay philippines

Username or Email Address

Remember Me

Exploring the Death Penalty in the Philippines Essay

Is the death penalty truly an effective deterrent to crime? And what are the ramifications of its application in the Philippines ? Join us as we delve into the controversial topic of capital punishment in the Philippines , examining its history, legal implications, and impact on human rights.

The Philippines made history in 1987 when it became the first Asian country in modern times to abolish the death penalty for all crimes. However, in 1993, it was reintroduced for “heinous” crimes due to public fear and frustration at increasing rates of violent crime. Today, there are more than 400 people on Death Row in the Philippines, making it one of the countries with the highest sentencing rates in the world.

Key Takeaways:

• The death penalty was abolished in the Philippines in 1987 but reintroduced in 1993 for “heinous” crimes.
• The country has one of the highest sentencing rates in the world, with over 400 people on Death Row.
• Arguments against the death penalty include doubts about its deterrent effect and concerns about fairness in trials.
• Studies have shown that the death penalty does not act as a greater deterrent to crime compared to other forms of punishment.
• The international community opposes the death penalty, and the Philippines risks violating its human rights obligations if it reinstates it.

The Legal and Human Rights Context

In 1987, the Philippines promulgated a Constitution with a Bill of Rights, solidifying its commitment to upholding human rights. This important document established an independent Commission on Human Rights and affirmed the country’s dedication to international human rights norms by acceding to major human rights treaties.

However, the reintroduction of the death penalty in the Philippines raises significant concerns regarding human rights violations. The right to life and the prohibition of cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment or punishment are fundamental human rights principles that must be protected.

There have been troubling allegations of torture and ill-treatment used to extract confessions, which not only violates human rights but also poses a grave risk of judicial error. These practices undermine the integrity and fairness of the criminal justice system, casting doubt on the credibility of its outcomes.

Furthermore, public doubts persist regarding the equity, impartiality, and effectiveness of the judicial system as a whole. Disparities in access to justice and the unequal treatment of individuals based on their socio-economic status undermine the principles of equality and fairness under the law.

In upholding human rights in the Philippines , it is crucial to critically assess the impact of the death penalty on both the constitutional framework and the broader human rights landscape of the country.

Arguments Against the Death Penalty

Opponents of the death penalty in the Philippines present compelling arguments that challenge its efficacy and fairness in the criminal justice system. These arguments shed light on the flaws and potential injustices associated with capital punishment.

1. Lack of Deterrence

One of the key arguments against the death penalty is that it does not act as a greater deterrent to crime compared to other forms of punishment. Research has shown that the threat of execution does not significantly reduce crime rates. Instead, addressing the root causes of criminal behavior and implementing effective rehabilitation programs have been proven to be more successful in reducing recidivism.

2. Risk of Wrongful Convictions

Another critical concern with the death penalty is the inherent risk of miscarriages of justice. No criminal justice system is immune from errors, and wrongful convictions can and do occur. Once a person is executed, there is no opportunity for exoneration if new evidence or factual errors come to light. This irrevocability magnifies the importance of ensuring fair trials and avoiding irreversible mistakes.

3. Disproportionate Impact on Disadvantaged Sectors

Advocates against the death penalty argue that it disproportionately affects disadvantaged sectors of society, exacerbating inequality before the law. Studies have shown that individuals from marginalized communities, who often lack access to quality legal representation, are more likely to receive harsher sentences, including the death penalty. This systemic bias raises concerns about fairness and equal treatment under the law.

“The death penalty fails to address the root causes of crime and perpetuates a system that disproportionately impacts vulnerable individuals and communities.” – Human Rights Watch

Promoting alternatives to capital punishment that focus on rehabilitation, reform, and addressing societal inequalities could lead to a more just and equitable criminal justice system.

These arguments challenge the effectiveness, fairness, and justice of the death penalty in the Philippines. Considering these concerns is crucial in promoting a criminal justice system that upholds human rights, equality, and the pursuit of genuine justice.

Impact on Crime Levels

Contrary to popular belief, the death penalty does not have a significant impact on reducing crime levels or enhancing the security of law-abiding citizens. Numerous studies conducted in various countries have consistently shown that there is no evidence to support the notion that the death penalty acts as a greater deterrent to criminals than other forms of punishment. Instead, several underlying factors contribute to the root causes of criminal behavior.

The Real Factors Fueling Criminality

Factors such as poverty, social inequality, unemployment, and the weakening of social control methods play a much larger role in fueling criminality. Socioeconomic disparities and lack of access to basic needs often lead individuals towards criminal activities . Addressing these fundamental issues and implementing effective social and economic policies can have a more significant impact on crime reduction and the overall well-being of society.

“The death penalty doesn’t solve the issues of crime; it merely masks the underlying societal problems that need to be addressed.” – Dr. Maria Santos, Criminologist

Statistics on Death Penalty and Crime Rates

Let’s examine the statistics on death penalty implementation and crime rates in several countries:

As seen in the table above, the data does not support the argument that the death penalty leads to lower crime rates. In fact, countries with abolished death penalty have shown low to moderate crime rates, while countries that retain the death penalty exhibit varying levels of crime rates.

The statistics clearly indicate that the death penalty is not a reliable tool for crime prevention. To ensure a safer society, it is crucial to address the root causes of crime and implement comprehensive social and economic reforms that uplift communities and provide opportunities for all individuals.

Concerns about Fair Trials

The rapid rate of death sentences in the Philippines is taking place within a context of public doubts over the equity, impartiality, and effectiveness of the judicial system. There is a perception that those with influence or wealth can enjoy impunity, while those from disadvantaged sectors of society face disadvantage in the criminal justice system. Safeguards to ensure fair trials, including the right to competent legal counsel, are not consistently upheld.

Historical Use of the Death Penalty

The history of the death penalty in the Philippines is a complex and evolving one. Capital punishment has been a part of the country’s criminal justice system during different periods of its history.

Under Spanish rule, the Spanish Codigo Penal of 1848, which was introduced in the Philippines in 1884, included several capital offenses such as treason, piracy, and murder. During this time, the death penalty was carried out through methods such as firing squad and garrote.

Following the introduction of internal self-government in 1934 and full independence in 1946, there were changes in the application of the death penalty. The newly established Philippine government sought to reform the criminal justice system, and discussions on the abolition of the death penalty emerged.

However, in more recent times, the death penalty was reintroduced in the Philippines in 1993 for “heinous” crimes, due to public fear and increasing rates of violent crime. Today, the country grapples with a high number of individuals on Death Row and ongoing debates on the efficacy and ethics of capital punishment.

International Human Rights Obligations

The Philippines ratified the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in 2007, which requires countries to abolish the death penalty. Reinstating the death penalty would violate the country’s obligations under international human rights law and could result in consequences from foreign trade partners. The international community, including human rights organizations like Human Rights Watch, opposes the death penalty.

Current Situation and Government Stance

The Duterte administration in the Philippines has publicly supported the reinstatement of the death penalty. This stance aligns with President Rodrigo Duterte’s tough-on-crime approach, particularly in addressing drug offenses. Currently, the House Committee on Justice is deliberating on bills that propose the reintroduction of capital punishment, specifically through lethal injection.

President Duterte’s controversial “war on drugs” has already resulted in thousands of deaths attributed to both the police and unidentified assailants. With the government’s overwhelming majority in Congress, it is likely that the death penalty bills will gain support and further progress in the legislative process.

“We need to bring back the death penalty to instill fear, to deter, to prevent crime,” President Duterte said during his 2020 State of the Nation Address.

The government’s position on the death penalty reflects its determination to tackle crime effectively and send a strong message about the consequences of engaging in illegal activities . However, this stance has drawn criticism and concerns from human rights advocates, who argue that capital punishment can lead to violations of the right to life and may exacerbate issues of judicial fairness and errors.

As the debate on the reintroduction of the death penalty continues, it is essential to consider the potential impact on human rights, the criminal justice system, and the broader social fabric of the Philippines.

Risks and Impact on Human Rights

Reimposing the death penalty in the Philippines would worsen the human rights situation and lead to further violations. It would perpetuate the government’s “war on drugs” and increase bloodshed. The rights-violating abyss that the country would descend into cannot be overstated.

“The death penalty contradicts the right to life and the prohibition of cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment or punishment. It puts at risk the fundamental principles of justice and fairness,” – International Federation for Human Rights

Reinstating capital punishment would undermine the Philippines’ credibility and leverage to negotiate on behalf of its citizens facing execution abroad. The government’s recent withdrawal from the International Criminal Court, coupled with the potential reintroduction of the death penalty, places the country on a dangerous path towards becoming an international human rights pariah.

The death penalty in the Philippines is a complex issue that raises serious questions about human rights and the fairness of the judicial system. Arguments against the death penalty emphasize concerns regarding its efficacy as a deterrent, the potential for wrongful convictions, and its disproportionate impact on marginalized communities. Furthermore, reintroducing the death penalty would violate the country’s international human rights obligations.

The opposition to capital punishment is not confined to the Philippines alone; the international community, including prominent human rights organizations like Human Rights Watch, rejects the death penalty as a violation of fundamental human rights. Restoring the death penalty would not only damage the Philippines’ standing in the global community but also hinder its ability to advocate for its citizens facing execution abroad.

It is important to consider the government’s stance on the death penalty, particularly in the context of the ongoing “war on drugs” initiated by President Rodrigo Duterte. The administration’s support for capital punishment, combined with the alarming number of extrajudicial killings and human rights abuses, raises concerns about the state of human rights in the country. Reimposing the death penalty would exacerbate these issues and further undermine the Philippines’ credibility as a protector of human rights.

In conclusion, the death penalty in the Philippines should be critically examined in light of its potential ramifications for human rights and the judicial system. The arguments against capital punishment, the opposition from the international community, and the questionable human rights situation within the country all contribute to the conclusion that reinstating the death penalty would be a regressive step that contradicts the principles of justice and human rights.

What is the current status of the death penalty in the Philippines?

What are the main arguments against the death penalty in the philippines, does the death penalty have a significant impact on reducing crime levels, are fair trials guaranteed in the judicial system of the philippines, what is the historical use of the death penalty in the philippines, does the philippines have international human rights obligations regarding the death penalty, what is the government’s stance on the death penalty in the philippines, what are the risks and impact of reinstating the death penalty in the philippines, what is the conclusion regarding the death penalty in the philippines, source links.

• https://www.kibin.com/essay-examples/an-argument-against-the-re-imposition-of-the-death-penalty-in-the-philippines-Yy0RFsgW
• https://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6a99f4.html
• https://www.hrw.org/news/2020/08/05/death-penalty-danger-philippines

Hello! I'm Wise, a Filipina with a deep love for my country and a passion for sharing its beauty with the world. As a writer, blogger, and videographer, I capture the essence of the Philippines through my eyes, hoping to give foreign visitors a true taste of what makes these islands so special.

From the vibrant streets of Manila to the tranquil beaches of Palawan, my journey is about uncovering the hidden gems and everyday wonders that define the Filipino spirit. My articles and blogs are not just travel guides; they are invitations to explore, to feel, and to fall in love with the Philippines, just as I have.

Through my videos, I strive to bring the sights, sounds, and stories of my homeland to life. Whether it's the local cuisine, the colorful festivals, or the warm smiles of the people, I aim to prepare visitors for an authentic experience.

For those seeking more than just a vacation, the Philippines can be a place of discovery and, perhaps, even love. My goal is to be your guide, not just to the places you'll visit, but to the experiences and connections that await in this beautiful corner of the world. Welcome to the Philippines, through my eyes. Let's explore together!

You may also like

Understanding Economic Inequality in the Philippines

Exploring the Preamble Of The Philippines Origins

Affordable DNA Test Options in the Philippines

Add comment, cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Want Flight, Hotel, and Restaurant Discounts for Your Philippines Trip? Join Below!

Email address:

Buy Me a Coffee

Death Penalty: Chris Watts Case

This essay about the Chris Watts murder case examines the tragic events where Watts murdered his pregnant wife and two daughters in Frederick, Colorado, in August 2018. It explores the public and legal responses, particularly focusing on the debates around the death penalty. The text discusses how Watts’ actions prompted discussions on punishment, revealing societal divisions over the morality and effectiveness of capital punishment versus life imprisonment. The essay ultimately reflects on the nature of evil, the justice system’s challenges, and the profound impacts of such crimes on society.

How it works

In August 2018, the United States was gripped by the harrowing case of Chris Watts, a seemingly ordinary man whose actions would thrust him into the spotlight of infamy. Watts, a resident of Frederick, Colorado, was convicted of the murders of his pregnant wife, Shanann, and their two young daughters, Bella and Celeste. The case shocked the nation, sparking debates about the death penalty, the nature of evil, and the fragility of family bonds.

Shanann Watts, 34, was reported missing along with her daughters on August 13, 2018.

As details emerged, the picture painted by investigators was chilling. Chris Watts initially denied involvement, pleading for their safe return in media interviews and on social media. However, under mounting pressure, he eventually confessed to strangling Shanann in a fit of rage after she confronted him about his extramarital affair. He then admitted to smothering his daughters and disposing of their bodies at an oil site where he worked.

The case of Chris Watts encapsulates the darkest depths of human depravity. Here was a man who, by all outward appearances, seemed to lead a normal life. He had a job, a home, and a family. Yet beneath this facade lay a disturbing truth—a truth that would shatter the lives of those around him and reverberate throughout the nation.

In the aftermath of the murders, the question of punishment loomed large. Colorado is one of 28 states in the U.S. that still retains the death penalty, and many believed that Chris Watts deserved nothing less than the ultimate punishment for his heinous crimes. The idea of retribution, of balancing the scales of justice with the ultimate sacrifice, held sway in the court of public opinion.

However, the death penalty is a deeply divisive issue, one that raises profound moral and ethical questions. Opponents argue that it is inherently flawed, pointing to cases of wrongful convictions and the disproportionate impact it has on marginalized communities. They question whether the state should have the power to take a life, even in the pursuit of justice.

In the case of Chris Watts, the question of whether he should receive the death penalty became a central point of contention. On one hand, there were those who argued that his crimes were so heinous, so beyond the pale, that no punishment short of death could suffice. They saw the death penalty as a means of closure for the victims’ families, a way to ensure that justice was served.

On the other hand, there were those who questioned the efficacy and morality of the death penalty itself. They argued that life imprisonment without the possibility of parole would be a more fitting punishment, allowing Watts to spend the rest of his days reflecting on the enormity of his crimes. Moreover, they pointed to the potential for error in the justice system, highlighting cases where innocent individuals had been sentenced to death.

Ultimately, the decision fell to the prosecutors, who opted not to seek the death penalty in exchange for Chris Watts’ guilty plea. Instead, he was sentenced to five life terms without the possibility of parole, ensuring that he would spend the remainder of his days behind bars.

The case of Chris Watts forces us to confront uncomfortable truths about the nature of evil and the limits of justice. It reminds us that evil can lurk in the most unexpected of places, hidden behind a mask of normalcy. It challenges us to grapple with the complexities of punishment and the moral dilemmas inherent in seeking retribution.

As we reflect on the tragic events that unfolded in Frederick, Colorado, we are reminded of the fragility of life and the preciousness of those we hold dear. And as we consider the fate of Chris Watts, we are left to ponder whether true justice can ever truly be served in a world where the line between good and evil is often blurred.

Cite this page

Death Penalty: Chris Watts Case. (2024, Apr 29). Retrieved from https://papersowl.com/examples/death-penalty-chris-watts-case/

"Death Penalty: Chris Watts Case." PapersOwl.com , 29 Apr 2024, https://papersowl.com/examples/death-penalty-chris-watts-case/

PapersOwl.com. (2024). Death Penalty: Chris Watts Case . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/death-penalty-chris-watts-case/ [Accessed: 29 Apr. 2024]

"Death Penalty: Chris Watts Case." PapersOwl.com, Apr 29, 2024. Accessed April 29, 2024. https://papersowl.com/examples/death-penalty-chris-watts-case/

"Death Penalty: Chris Watts Case," PapersOwl.com , 29-Apr-2024. [Online]. Available: https://papersowl.com/examples/death-penalty-chris-watts-case/. [Accessed: 29-Apr-2024]

PapersOwl.com. (2024). Death Penalty: Chris Watts Case . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/death-penalty-chris-watts-case/ [Accessed: 29-Apr-2024]

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Hire a writer to get a unique paper crafted to your needs.

Our writers will help you fix any mistakes and get an A+!

Please check your inbox.

You can order an original essay written according to your instructions.

Trusted by over 1 million students worldwide

1. Tell Us Your Requirements

2. Pick your perfect writer

3. Get Your Paper and Pay

Hi! I'm Amy, your personal assistant!

Don't know where to start? Give me your paper requirements and I connect you to an academic expert.

short deadlines

100% Plagiarism-Free

Certified writers

Write My Essay Service - Working to Help You

Do you want to have more free time for personal development and fun? Or are you confused with your professor's directions? Whatever your reason for coming to us is, you are welcome! We are a legitimate professional writing service with student-friendly prices and with an aim to help you achieve academic excellence. To get an A on your next assignment simply place an order or contact our 24/7 support team.

John N. Williams

Final Paper

Is essay writing service legal.

Essay writing services are legal if the company has passed a number of necessary checks and is licensed. This area is well developed and regularly monitored by serious services. If a private person offers you his help for a monetary reward, then we would recommend you to refuse his offer. A reliable essay writing service will always include terms of service on their website. The terms of use describe the clauses that customers must agree to before using a product or service. The best online essay services have large groups of authors with diverse backgrounds. They can complete any type of homework or coursework, regardless of field of study, complexity, and urgency.

When you contact the company Essayswriting, the support service immediately explains the terms of cooperation to you. You can control the work of writers at all levels, so you don't have to worry about the result. To be sure of the correctness of the choice, the site contains reviews from those people who have already used the services.

Testimonials

Gombos Zoran

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Judge in Sept. 11 Case Visits Former C.I.A. Black Site

Col. Matthew McCall toured the part of the prison at Guantánamo Bay where, in 2007, federal agents obtained now-disputed confessions from terrorism suspects.

By Carol Rosenberg

Reporting from Guantánamo Bay

In a first, a military judge at Guantánamo Bay on Friday crossed into the security zone containing the wartime prison and inspected a former C.I.A. “black site” facility at the center of a dispute over the taint of torture in the Sept. 11, 2001 , case.

It was a noteworthy moment in the arc of the two-decade history of the Guantánamo trials. No war court judge had before made the five-mile trip to look at the detention operations, where the military maintains the only known, still-intact remnant of the network of overseas prisons that the C.I.A. operated from 2002 to 2009.

But Col. Matthew N. McCall, the judge , is edging toward a decision on whether the accused mastermind of the attacks, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed , and three co-defendants voluntarily confessed to conspiring in the attacks in their fourth year of detention, under questioning by F.B.I. agents at Guantánamo prison.

And the prison site he visited, called Camp Echo, has played a central but covert role in the case. From 2003 to 2004, the C.I.A. kept five prized prisoners there, near the prison facilities but out of reach of the International Red Cross. It was part of its secret overseas network that hid about 120 “high-value detainees” in such far-flung sites as Afghanistan, Thailand and Poland.

In April 2004, the agency closed the black site at Guantánamo and moved those five prisoners to other secret sites, on the advice of the Justice Department, to avoid a looming U.S. Supreme Court decision later that year that granted detainees at U.S.-controlled Guantánamo Bay access to lawyers.

After President George W. Bush ordered Mr. Mohammed and 13 other C.I.A. prisoners be moved to Guantánamo in September 2006 to face trial, federal agents used the same portion of Camp Echo to obtain ostensibly lawful confessions by what the prosecutors called “clean teams.”

At issue now is whether statements the men made in 2007 are admissible at the eventual trial of Mr. Mohammed and the three men who are accused of being his accomplices in helping the 19 hijackers who took part in the Sept. 11 attacks.

Prosecutors consider those interrogations the most critical evidence in the capital case that has been mired in preliminary hearings since 2012. They argue that the statements were voluntary, and so would be admissible.

Defense lawyers argue that, by 2007, Mr. Mohammed and the others were conditioned through years of torture, solitary confinement and constant C.I.A. debriefings that they were helpless but to answer questions on demand.

Military judges have generally stayed away from the detainee operation, which currently holds 30 prisoners . Judges have summoned commanders to court to answer questions and lawyers have provided photographs of prison conditions as court evidence.

Lawyers for one of the defendants, Ammar al Baluchi , proposed the field trip to the judge, who spent less than 20 minutes inspecting the compound of wooden huts containing steel cells that are split in two.

One half has a metal pallet for a sleeping mat, shower, sink and toilet, also made of metal, Alka Pradhan , Mr. Baluchi’s lawyer, said in court Friday to orient the judge before his visit. The other half was set up as an interrogation room and has linoleum and a bolt in the floor, where a detainee’s ankle is shackled during legal meetings still held there.

“On information and belief,” she said, there also was “a shackle point on the ceiling” for a time. But she did not say when.

In one portion of Camp Echo, where reporters have visited, the wooden huts have windows. But huts in the portion where the C.I.A. prisoners were held and interrogated have no natural light — unless the outer door is left open.

Ms. Pradhan said the tour was meant to support the defense team’s argument that Mr. Baluchi considered the interrogation in 2007 to be another stop in his odyssey of torture through the black sites. Interrogators testified that they shared meals from McDonald’s and chatted with him.

But Ms. Pradhan said that merely being there, in a site similar to earlier black sites where he was beaten, shackled nude and deprived of sleep, “triggered an intense fear in him” that left him no choice but to tell his interrogators what they wanted to hear.

Colonel McCall left his black robe at the courthouse and drove himself and an aide to the checkpoint that controls access to the prison complex, a 15-minute ride past an Irish pub, McDonald’s and a bowling alley that serves the base of about 5,000 residents — most of whom have never been allowed inside the prison zone.

In 2019, the U.S. government declassified the fact that a portion of Camp Echo had been a black site at Guantánamo, but defense lawyers had been aware of that national security secret for years. Three defendants in the capital cases told their counsel that they had been there before.

One of them, Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri , is accused of orchestrating Al Qaeda’s suicide bombing of the U.S.S. Cole destroyer off Yemen on Oct. 12, 2000, in the longest-running death-penalty case at Guantánamo Bay.

Last year, the military judge in that case, Col. Lanny J. Acosta Jr., threw out the statements Mr. Nashiri made to federal interrogations at Echo in 2007, as derived from his years of torture by the C.I.A.

“The F.B.I. interview in 2007 actually occurred in the same complex — and perhaps even the same cell,” he wrote.

Carol Rosenberg reports on the wartime prison and court at Guantánamo Bay. She has been covering the topic since the first detainees were brought to the U.S. base in 2002. More about Carol Rosenberg