Senate hearing on death penalty hits snag

MANILA, Philippines – Efforts to revive the death penalty in the country hit a snag yesterday at the Senate, as senators warned of serious repercussions on the Philippines’ global trade deals and possible violation of international rights treaties to which the country is a signatory.                 

Sen. Richard Gordon, chairman of the committee, suspended further hearings on the proposal until the Department of Justice (DOJ) comes up with a good legal justification that the Philippines would not violate any international treaty if it revives the death penalty.

One such treaty is the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which committed the country not to impose the death penalty. 

“It would not look good for a nation who signs a treaty to leave it, especially if it is the ICCPR or International Humanitarian Law,” Gordon said. “But let’s see if we can abandon the treaty and proceed to what we want to do.” 

The suspension came after the first hearing on death penalty bills for heinous crimes filed by Senators Joseph Victor Ejercito, Sherwin Gatchalian, Panfilo Lacson and Manny Pacquiao.                 

Gordon and Sens. Frank Drilon, Leila de Lima and Paolo Benigno Aquino IV raised the issue on the country’s treaty obligations, as well as possible repercussions on trade agreements with countries or economic blocs against the death penalty.        

The senators pointed out that under the Constitution, international law forms part of the country’s legal obligations.        

Aquino said economic managers and officials of the Department of Foreign Affairs should also be invited to discuss the implications with the Senate committee.        

Deputy Senior State Prosecutor Richard Fadullon admitted to the committee that the Philippines would be violating international laws if the country reimposes the death penalty before it withdraws from its treaty obligations.

Drilon and Gordon warned that if Congress decides to push through with reviving the death penalty, President Duterte might be accused of committing culpable violation of the Constitution. 

De Lima cited a Supreme Court ruling stating that treaties and international agreements duly ratified have a limiting effect on the country’s exercise of an act of sovereignty.

Citing Article 56 of the Vienna Convention, of which the Philippines is a party, she stressed the country cannot legally withdraw from the ICCPR and the Protocol, as they don’t have provisions on withdrawal and denunciation. 

De Lima flares up

Yesterday’s Senate hearing also screeched to an unexpected pause when De Lima flared up after lawyer Ferdinand Topacio named her as one accused of drug trafficking while explaining that drug lords go on with their trade even behind bars because they are not executed for their crimes.

Topacio was at the hearing to support the bills as representative of the Volunteers Against Crime and Corruption (VACC) and was also among those who filed complaints against De Lima last year for alleged drug trafficking.

“Attorney Topacio here, while not in very expressed terms, just called me a drug trafficker. I want him to take that back!” De Lima exclaimed, blurting out further: “Why single out only Sen. Leila de Lima? I’m not a drug trafficker! Why don’t you name the real drug traffickers? I’m the only one you’re charging.”

Gordon suspended the proceeding for a minute after her outburst. 

Arguments for death penalty        

Pacquiao spoke at the start of the Senate hearing, arguing: “We cannot ignore the immensity of the drug problem in our country.

“On a personal level, I can forgive. However, the heinous crime of drug trafficking is committed not just against a person, but against the nation. Drug traffickers deserve death penalty.”  

Bureau of Corrections director general Benjamin delos Santos, in supporting capital punishment, noted a drastic difference in the number of convictions for heinous crimes before and after its abolition in the country.

He said before 2006, when Congress passed Republic Act 9346 abolishing the death penalty in the country, only 186 inmates were convicted of heinous crimes.

After 2006, he said, a total of 6,204 were sentenced for heinous crimes or a 3,280 percent increase from the time the death penalty was still in place.

The VACC noted that the justice system in the country has worsened since the abolition of the death penalty.

The group said convicted criminals, instead of reforming, continued to peddle drugs from within prison.

“We need the death penalty law if we are to succeed in the war against crime, corruption and illegal drugs,” VACC founding chairman Dante Jimenez said in a statement submitted to the Senate. “Some 16 million Filipinos gave their mandate to President Duterte when he promised to restore the death penalty. That was more than sufficient proof of the public sentiment about what it wants the administration to do for them.” 

DOJ’s Fadullon said the effects of the ongoing war on drugs, including the number of drug users and dealers who have surrendered, and victims of the campaign are reasons enough to consider reopening the debates on the revival of the death penalty. 

Augusto Marquez Jr. of the Philippine National Police’s Directorate for Investigation and Detective Management said the long list of heinous crimes committed and the resulting loss of innocent lives is a compelling reason to restore the death penalty.

“The restoration of the death penalty alone may not be an all-out solution to address the commission of heinous crimes. Nevertheless, the PNP believes that the restoration of the death penalty will be a big first step geared towards the prevention of the commission of heinous crimes,” Marquez said.

Arguments against death penalty

For those opposed to the death penalty, there is no compelling reason to revive it at this time.

Sen. Risa Hontiveros argued that the death penalty has a disproportionate impact on the poor.

Hontiveros said there is little guarantee that innocent people will not be sentenced to death because of a flawed justice system.

“The death penalty is a cruel and inhuman form of punishment that gives up on the rehabilitative purpose of the justice system. The death penalty is inefficient; it actually costs more than life imprisonment and without making us safer. So it is not fair to require taxpayers to shoulder the burden for retribution alone. The death penalty denies due process of law,” she said.

Commission on Human Rights Commissioner Karen Gomez-Dumpit said death penalty in the country is inclined to discriminate against the economically disadvantaged.

“It seems to perpetuate the system of marginalization against the poor and vulnerable, the uneducated and powerless. It is a known fact that the justice system is biased against those who cannot afford to hire competent legal representation. Records show that those sentenced to death penalty belong to the lower class of society,” Dumpit said.

She cited a reported judicial error rate of 71.77 percent during the 11-year period when the death penalty was imposed from 1993 to 2004.

In its advisory on the re-imposition of the death penalty, the CHR said fighting crime with “violent assertion and revenge as motivation will only perpetuate a culture of violence.”

Maria Janica Brigola of the Philippine Commission on Women said the data presented by PNP chief Ronald dela Rosa himself on declining crime rate in the country could serve as the strongest argument against claims that there is compelling reason to re-impose the death penalty.

In a position paper submitted to the Senate, Social Welfare Secretary Judy Taguiwalo said her department considers respect for human dignity as one of its core values.

Taguiwalo said instead of reinstituting capital punishment, the government must prioritize reforming existing criminal and justice systems to ensure that offenders from whatever social class are fairly brought to justice.

She said capital punishment is anti-poor in the context of the Philippines’ justice system, where resolutions to cases are always long delayed and the process itself is expensive.

She also cited the results of a 2004 survey of the Free Legal Assistance Group, which state that 70 percent of 1,121 inmates on death row before the death penalty was abolished in 2006 earned less than P10,000 a month.

“The meager income of the poor, aggravated by the lack of education and marginal economic opportunities, preclude them from affording effective legal representation in court,” she said. 

Militant labor group Sentro ng mga Nagkakaisa at Progresibong Manggagawa (SENTRO) said workers are backing the call of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) against the death penalty and extrajudicial killings.

SENTRO said pending bills favoring death penalty restoration threaten institutions and would only destroy many lives.

“The government’s death policies, such as Oplan Tokhang, death penalty and lowering the age of criminality will bring us a the reign of peace that is more of the peace of the grave, cramped with the bones of thousands of innocent and untried victims,” SENTRO said in a statement.

“As much as we workers do not always share the political views of many of our religious groups, we nevertheless loudly proclaim our conviction with them right now: a civilization built on peace, justice and love,” SENTRO said. – With Marvin Sy, Janvic Mateo, Mayen Jaymalin