The Philippines Becomes the 125th Nation to Abolish the Death Penalty The Philippines has become the 125th nation to abolish the death penalty, with President Gloria Arroyo signing a law ending capital punishment following its earlier passage by the legislature. At a signing ceremony in the Presidential Palace, Mrs. Arroyo hailed the new law as a big step forward for the Philippines, but also assured critics she will remain tough on crime. "I allay the concerns of those who think that the abolition of the death penalty opens the flood gates to heinous acts," said President Arroyo. "We shall continue to devote the increasing weight of our resources to the prevention and control of serious crimes rather than take the lives of those who commit them." it. It is a flagship bill," said Rosales. "I know that the direction and the trend is towards more rehabilitative and restorative justice rather than pure punitive justice. And this is the trend of civilized nations, and I am happy that the Philippines has taken a step forward in that direction." Ricardo Saludo, secretary in charge of the Cabinet, says a change in the social and legal climate likely influenced the Congress to finally pass the legislation. "It has really emerged that what is important in fighting crime is the quality of enforcement and cooperation between the community and the police, rather than the strictness of the penalty," noted Saludo. "On top of that, this year, the Supreme Court came out with its own ruling that the death penalty is against the constitution." The opinion of the Catholic Church may also have influenced the issue. The Philippines is a predominantly Roman Catholic nation and the Vatican's envoy to Manila has congratulated the president and lawmakers for abolishing capital punishment. But not everyone is happy. Leaders of anti-crime groups say the government acted without consulting them. Dante Jimenez, whose brother was killed by a drug syndicate in 1990, heads Volunteers Against Crime and Corruption. He says the move comes at a bad time, when terrorists, criminal syndicates and kidnappers are active and the police and justice system is weak. "Victims of heinous crimes do not have, any more, the legal weapon to penalize those who have hurt them, who have inflicted harm to their loved ones," commented Jimenez. Jimenez says he is mobilizing victims, urging people to arm themselves against criminals and to pursue preventative measures to fight hard-core criminals. Violent crime is rife in the Philippines. The murder rate is high, with guns and explosives being readily available and often used to settle disputes. Kidnapping for ransom is also common. With the new law, the Philippines becomes the 25th country in the Asia-Pacific region to end capital punishment in law or in practice, according to Amnesty International. However, the death penalty is still in place in many of Asia's biggest nations, including Japan, South Korea, Indonesia, Thailand and China, which executes more people than any other country.
I wish the US would be as progressive as the Philippines and abolish the death penalty. In other areas, I damned glad not to be living there. Not that there's anything wrong with that! Saint Louis, I definitely agree! Keep D&D Civil.
Heck, so do I, Max. As a matter of fact, I'm going to allow myself a Heineken, right now, in your honor, your honor. Cheers! (man, I'm really getting excited about the draft... can't wait! ) Keep D&D Civil.
Not to mention it has one of the most corrupt governments and highest poverty levels in Southeast Asia... I have a question, for those who are wanting to abolish the death penalty.... Why do you feel it is the responsibility of society to pay for jails and rehabilitation for the people who would commit crimes against humanity worthy of such a severe penalty?
In theory I have nothing against the death penalty. However, too many innocent people have died and there are more innocent people on death row. Not a large percentage of course, but 1 person is too many.
Every time I begin to think that the death penalty may be inhumane, I read a case that reaffirms my belief that it's an appropriate punishment for some. http://www.click2houston.com/news/9425598/detail.html The girl went to Elsik the same time I did and we knew a lot of the same people. She and her boyfriend were carjacked by 4 guys and 1 female. She was sexually assaulted before they were both shot to death. This was after they had already given up the car. The accused are also being charged in the murder of 2 other people.
Governor Perry is at your service: http://www.governor.state.tx.us/divisions/press/pressreleases/PressRelease.2005-06-17.2331
personally, i just think its wrong to take another persons life. i dont think any human has the right to take the life of another, no matter how bad that person might have been. i also find the fact that innocent people have been put to death by the state to be a justifiable reason to end it. really, one is too many. that being said, what i would like to see is a system where murderers, rapists, child molesters and maybe even those who commit armed robbery get life with zero chance of parole...ever. that doesnt mean they should sit around milking off the public though. make them spend the rest of their days doing hard labor and paying back their debt to society. bring back the chain gang, stripped suits, warden on horseback w/ a shotgun, ect. they earn their keep and all extra money they earn goes to the victims families.
#1 - The total cost of a death sentence is more expensive than the cost of a life-in-prison sentence. So the better question is why do you feel we should spend extra taxpayer money to put someone to death? #2 - We've found several people on death row just in the last few years that were found innocent. How many more are there? Do you feel OK executing someone who might be proven innocent 10 years down the road?
I agree with #2 being a problem that must be fixed. However, I'm having trouble believing that your #1 is true. Do you have a link of some kind? I'm not being cheeky here I just have never heard this. I mean when you factor the years of care we're not giving criminals that have been put to death you have to figure it'd be cheaper.
From what I understand, it is the appeals process that is the expensive part. Due to the finality of it all, and the need to allow as many appeals as possible, the time spent by prosecutors, judges, etc all totals up to ridiculous amounts. That, combined with the fact that many prisoners sit on death row for years and years, totals to more than most life sentences. I could be wrong on this, but this is what I've consistently heard (never studied it myself). One popular solution in the 1990's was to try to limit the number of appeals, but then you just exacerbate problem #2 even more, so that movement kind of quieted down some. All that said, I'm not sure how you solve #2. False guilties always have and likely always will be a part of the system. The difference between the death sentence and all other sentences is that there's no possibility to try to undo the mistake.
I hadn't heard of this. Sounds good to give juries another option in cases where death may not be warranted, but the person shouldn't ever be roaming the streets again. I just don't have enough faith in the judicial system to be absolutely positive that the system gets all death row cases correct.
