ONE of the authors of the bill seeking to revive the death penalty on Wednesday said deliberations on the measure are nothing but an “unnecessary distraction” in the face of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic.
Muntinlupa Rep. Ruffy Biazon withdrew his bill from the agenda of the committee on justice, which opened deliberations on the various bills reviving capital punishment a week after President Duterte asked Congress to pass the bill.
“I believe that at this point, a contentious social issue such as the death penalty may be an unnecessary distraction in the effort to consolidate public and private sector support and focus against the pandemic,” Biazon told the online hearing.
“A socially and politically divisive debate on the death penalty will be detrimental to the Heal as One mantra. The public expects Congress to give priority measures that directly address the public health emergency we are currently facing,” he added.
So far, 12 bills pushing for the death penalty for certain heinous crimes are pending with the panel chaired by Leyte Rep. Vicente Veloso. Six of the measures seek to impose capital punishment for violations of RA 9165 or the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002.
Biazon maintained that capital punishment is the “appropriate and commensurate” penalty for high-level drug traffickers, even if his bill will no longer be part of a consolidated version that the committee will eventually approve.
“However, I also believe that there’s a time for everything, even in legislation. With two more years remaining in the mandate of the 18th Congress and the term of the President, I believe there is still time for the consideration of the bill after the pandemic has been placed under control or has died down,” he said.
Surigao del Norte Rep. Robert Ace Barbers, chair of the committee on dangerous drugs and a principal author of the measure, said death is the “only penalty that would bring shivers to the bones of the evildoers.”
“I am for death penalty no matter who our president is,” he said. “It’s the only deterrent to the commission of heinous crimes, the only thing that even the most hardened criminals fear.”
Barbers said it is not true that only poor people will be punished with death if the such a law is passed because the country’s justice system ensures everyone’s right to due process, adding that the state can appoint a lawyer to defend an accused if he or she cannot afford one.
Quezon City Rep. Christopher “Kit” Belmonte, a member of the Liberal Party, said Duterte’s call for the revival of the death penalty only shows his double standard in handling the implications of international laws.
He said the new Anti-Terrorism Law was approved so the country would avoid being in default of its international obligation while the death penalty is being revived despite the country’s inclusion in international conventions that call for its total abolition.
“While I do not dispute our sovereign right to enact our own laws, (we seem to be inconsistent),” Belmonte told the panel.
Justice Assistant Secretary Nicolas Ty said there is legal impediment in bringing back the death penalty despite the country being a signatory in international agreements because the 1986 Constitution allows the Philippines to impose the capital punishment.
While there needs to be some kind of reconciliation between local laws and international agreements, he said the Department of Justice believes that it cannot lead to the “prevalence of international law over our domestic law and the Constitution.”
“On the difference between the current situation with respect to the death penalty and the Anti-Terror Act, we are not yet certain if reimposing the death penalty would be tantamount to a breach of our international obligations,” Ty told the panel on the questioning of Belmonte.
“If we look at the language of the ICCPR (International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights) and the Second Protocol, there does not appear to be express language that would say we are prohibited from reimposing the death penalty,” he added.
