What is it with death and killings that President Duterte thinks it is the only way to put a stop to crime and corruption?
In many instances in his three years as president, Duterte has uttered the words “I will kill you” in his effort to curb crime and corruption. In warning police officers involved in illegal drugs, the President warned: “If you’ll stay like this, son of a b*tch, I will really kill you. I have a special unit which will watch you for life and, if you commit even a small mistake, I’ll ask that you be killed.”
After reports came out that P6.4 billion worth of shabu had slipped out of Customs, the former Davao City mayor rambled: “Don’t underestimate me, I already warned you. You drug importers, I will really kill you. Told you before do not destroy my country and do not destroy the young people of my country now… Make a mistake, I will kill you. Period. I don’t give a sh*t about human rights.”
In a talk to policemen in 2017, Duterte said: “Your duty requires you to overcome the resistance of the person you are arresting… (if) he resists, and it is a violent one… you are free to kill the idiots, that is my order to you.”
Earlier that year, claiming that drug dealers were plotting to assassinate him, Duterte warned: “Either you kill me, or I kill you.”
Responding to international outrage over the thousands killed in his deadly drug war, Duterte raged: “Human rights, United Nations, that’s fine. If you have complaints, O.K. You want to file charges, fine. Look for evidence.” And then addressed criminals: “But still, I will kill you.”
Realizing that illegal drugs and corruption continue to hound his administration despite all the killings and the threats, Duterte urged Congress to re-impose the death penalty in heinous crimes and plunder, believing as do many of his Cabinet officials and allies in Congress that the death penalty would be an effective deterrent to crime.
In May 2016, just days after the presidential election, President-elect Duterte said he would ask Congress to allow public executions by hanging as part of a ruthless law-and-order crackdown that would also include ordering military snipers to kill suspected criminals.
He said capital punishment by hanging should be imposed for heinous crimes, and criminals convicted of killing, robbery and rape should receive “double the hanging.”
“After the first hanging, there will be another ceremony for the second time until the head is completely severed from the body,” he said. This is an overkill, of course, often used by Duterte to excite his audience during the presidential campaign. While his derring-do was hailed by several supporters, the proposal was met with strong opposition from various groups.
The Philippines is one of 139 countries all over the world that have abolished the death penalty from their statutes. It is the only country in Asia that does not impose the death penalty.
The country has at one time or another suspended or resumed capital punishment.
Capital punishment was banned by the 1987 Constitution in the Philippines except for certain heinous crimes. In 1993, during the term of President Fidel V. Ramos, the death penalty was revived although the first execution was carried out by lethal injection during the term of President Joseph Estrada. In 2000, Estrada called for a moratorium on the request of his spiritual advisor, Bishop Teodoro Bacani.
On April 15, 2006, Congress passed Republic Act 9346 that re-abolished the death penalty and in June that year, President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo commuted the death sentences of 1,230 death row inmates to life imprisonment of a minimum of 30 years.
Proponents of the death penalty all over the world cite its role as a major deterrent to crime as the primary reason capital punishments should be imposed. However, such claims have no basis in fact. In the Philippines, for example, the revival of the death penalty from 1993 to 2004 did not bring the number of violent crimes down.
In the US, Texas has had the most number of executions for years, but is still ranked 13th in the country in violent crimes and 17th in murders per 100,000 citizens. The American Civil Liberties Union said there is no credible evidence that the death penalty deters crime more effectively than long terms of imprisonment.
“States that have death penalty laws do not have lower crime rates or murder rates than states without such laws. And states that have abolished capital punishment show no significant changes in either crime or murder rates,” it said.
There is no evidence that serial killers and rapists would consider their death by lethal injection or in the gas chamber prior to committing crimes. Law enforcement experts say criminals usually operate with the belief they will not be caught.
Proponents also claim that “deserved punishment protects society morally by restoring this just order, making the wrongdoer pay a price equivalent to the harm he has done.” Abolitionists, however, counter: “To kill the person who has killed someone close to you is simply to continue the cycle of violence which ultimately destroys the avenger as well as the offender.”
The biggest argument against the death penalty, however, especially in the Philippines where the judicial system is far from ideal, is the real possibility that a wrongly convicted person could be put to death for a crime he did not commit but was unable to defend himself in court because of various factors, including inadequate legal representation by court-appointed defense attorneys, serious flaw in police investigative work, racial prejudice, political pressure to solve a case, and misrepresentation of evidence.
It is the poor who can’t afford to hire the best lawyers and who often have to rely on public defenders that end up in death rows, unable to defend themselves and nobody willing to listen to their protestation of innocence.
Even in the US, which boasts of one of the best judicial systems in the world, it has been established that two out of three death penalty convictions have been overturned on appeal because of police and prosecutorial misconduct.
In the Philippines, which has one of the worst law enforcement and judicial systems in the world, one can just imagine how many in its Death Row really deserve the capital punishment.
Abolitionists like Senator Richard J. Gordon, suggest that instead of death penalty, those convicted of certain violent crimes should instead be sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole and made to work while in prison, with a big portion of their pay given to victims or victims’ kin as payment of court-ordered restitution.
The death penalty, especially public hanging, is a senseless, barbaric form of state-aided revenge that has long been abolished by civilized society. The Philippines gained international recognition when it abolished the death penalty in 1987 and 2006, the only country in Asia to do so. Why join the ranks of the uncivilized again?
valabelgas@aol.com
Mr. Abelgas is a former editor of Manila Standard.