Essay, Pages 10 (2364 words)
One of the most contentious subjects in our country today is the revision of death penalty. Capital punishment is an absolute necessity in a nation that is in trouble. Rape these days is rampant and a debatable topic in the senate to be oppressed in capital punishment today. The criminal justice system stressed about administering the proper and precise way, instead of the productivity of the procedures required inside the system. And the delay in the due process that preserves the accused, accuser and society as a whole.
The death Penalty is capital punishment here in the Philippines.
It was abolished during the administration of Gloria Macapagal Aarroyo in year 2006. According to her, the death penalty should be abolished because it had not proven to be a deterrent to crime and had become a dead-letter law. Republic Act 9346 downgraded the death penalty to life imprisonment. Act No. 9346, also known as An Act Prohibiting the Imposition of the Death Penalty in the Philippines. Life imprisonment, on the different hand, has an indefinite duration, has no specific important points on pardon, and does now not come with compulsory accessory penalties.
According to the Republic Act No. 7659 Death Penalty will be imposed to the law offender that had been proved guilty of crimes. The following crimes will be punishable by the proposed death penalty. The following crimes are subjected to capital punishment;
Treason, Qualified piracy, Qualified bribery, Parricide, Murder, Infanticide, Rape, Kidnapping and serious illegal detention, Robbery with violence against or intimidation of persons, Destructive arson, Plunder, Importation of dangerous drugs and or controlled precursors and essential chemicals, Sale, trading, administration, dispensation, delivery, distribution and transportation of dangerous drugs and or controlled precursors and essential chemicals, Maintenance of drug den, Manufacture of dangerous drugs and or controlled precursor and essential chemicals, Possession of dangerous drugs, Cultivation or culture of plants classified as dangerous drugs, Unlawful prescription of dangerous drugs, Criminal liability of a public officer for misappropriation, misapplication or failure to account for the confiscated seized or surrendered drugs, Criminal liability for planting evidence, and Car napping.
In the statement of our President Rodrigo Duterte on the reimplementation of the Death Penalty, he said that the one way to stop criminals is to put them in distress. This is the time to attain the direction of protecting our people.
“In the Philippines, it is really an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. You took life; you must pay it with life. That is the only way to even. You cannot place a premium on the human mind that he will go straight,” he asserted. Senator Tito Sotto also agreed on the reimplementation of death penalty in the Philippines. There is no need for amending the justice system of the Philippines.
“I’m pushing for the death penalty for high-scale drug trafficking so that we’re not treated like a playground. We’re called a playground of drug traffickers. They can’t do it in Singapore or Malaysia or China because they’ll get killed. In the Philippines, they will be jailed in Bilibid with no air-conditioner but there’s a refrigerator, a television, and other things,” he said.
“The death penalty is the ultimate cruel, inhuman, and degrading punishment. Amnesty opposes the death penalty in all cases without exception – regardless of who is accused, the nature or circumstances of the crime, guilt or innocence or method of execution.”
In the argument of “an eye for an eye” Amnesty International strongly stands that if anyone who pushes to execute someone also deserved to die. For they believe Death Penalty violates the most fundamental human law. Any innocent people that are mistakenly executed cannot be reversed every decision is cannot be unsaid. Those who have lost deserved justice but criminals also deserve to have a fair trial. They added that research shown that Death Penalty decreases crimes. Different countries have abolished the death penalty capital punishment.
In year 2017 twenty-three countries have known imposing death penalty as capital punishment. There are recorded execution of 993 decreases by four percentfrom1,032 executions in 2016 and thirty-nine percent from 2015 from 1,634 executions, the highest number since 1989. China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Pakistan the countries with most executions occur.
In the book of Dr. Maboloc PhD in titled “Applied Ethics” in Chapter 6 Social Justice according to John Rawls, “Each individual has a sacredness established on equity that even the welfare of society can’t abrogate”.A right I for equal welfare for each individual in the privilege from everyone who is living in a particular place he lived. An individual had the right that can’t be yielded for the benefit of the majority.Unmistakably an actual existence of one individual who carried out wrongdoing illegalshould not be presented to death .
To sacrifice one’s welfare to the welfare of the majority is not a reason to take life. Whenever a person commits a crime against the public, one reason that is protecting him is his existence of being. The life of an individual as whole, there would no other reason that life as the coherent conveyor of importance. Aperson’s life can be best see as an organically, individual, or rather as the presence of an individual that might possibly be human.The presence of a being relates significance each individual is important regardless of what he do. Being ethically wrong by carrying out wrongdoings like assault is a motivation behind why there is a need in immediate respond from the society, justice system and government.
In contrary utilitarianism whatever action is being assessed, we should pick the one that will create the best that result to greater good. In the language of utilitarian’s, we ought to pick the choice that “augments utility”. Every action or activity that creates the biggest measure of good is a good choice for utilitarian. As indicated by John Stuart utilitarian principle says that an action is good in extent as they will promote human satisfaction. Along these lines, Mill “centers about the results neither of an actions and not on rights nor in moral suppositions”.
Utilitarianism, in contrast according to Shchercbinina to Kant’s theory of morality, bases the goodness of an activity on the outcomes it prompts – on the off chance that the outcomes are great, at that point the activity was great too. The decency of an activity is then dictated by the measure of satisfaction or despondency it causes. Utilitarian’s at that point argue that each individual’s satisfaction and welfare are similarly significant. In this manner, as indicated by utilitarian standards, a definitive objective throughout everyday life, the order of human lead is boosting utility.
The amending of Death Penalty in the country is not the only problem but the social justice system itself. I don’t agree with Senator Sotto when he said there is no need to change our social justice system. Because I believe death penalty is not the answer for all the crimes happening. Capital punishment does not secure us from being not hurt by others. Also, it does not guaranteeusthat no more will perpetrate appalling wrongdoing. Indeed, in the Philippines, national wrongdoing 15.3% expanded in year 1999. There were seven people were executed for various shocking wrongdoings.The government must do an action to prove that peace is possible without blood. To show to the people that they are true not wolves in sheep’s clothing in doing the fair treatment of law.
According to Lawrence Martin in assessing Jeremy’s Bentham influence in Political Economy. The major requirements for public service, according to Bentham, were moral, intellectual, and active aptitude. Bentham specifies policies and procedures governing personnel recruitment, selection, training, promotion, transfer, demotion, dismissal, etc. Selection, for example, is to be based on an open competitive examination in order to attract and secure the ablest talent. Without actually using the modern term, Bentham is essentially describing a merit system.
Some agree and some disagree to this situation we are facing. Both side have their own point. One aims to protect the people with justice. Justice is served with due process of law.Truly, criminals that are subjected to the Death Penalty will experience a long procedure in official courtroom. Also, the official courtroom discovered him liable and exposed to detainment and could be exposed to capital punishment. Being in prison is sufficient for it is the result of what he does illegal and his neighbor. Being a long way from somebody you cherish and being not with them is all that could possibly be needed for an individual who commits a criminal offense. In the “Principle of Stewardship” for we individual is only a defender and in charge of dealing with what the Almighty has given, and it is the endowment of life.
Furthermore, we are also individual and we are not qualified for take one’s life. If this individual would be endured he could hurt increasingly honest individuals. Also, for that individual in power like police should take be in charge of that. Being in prison is sufficient for it is the result of what hedo is illegal and his neighbor. To have peace and harmonious world a law is needed. A rule to role the society in a same manner with selfless intentions results peace. The Second one is protect everyone’s life in all means.Even those harshest and most grounded hoodlums living Even in those people who commit rape and murder, to correct the misconduct Death Penalty is a must. For the happiness of greater number other things will be sacrifice.
The position is to protect no matter who he is and what he does. After all he is a human being not a rational being. But, are the new social law is necessary to maintain safety, peace and harmony? All of us is created with goodness, our existence is already good. We are given freewill to decide and to be rational beings. Goodness is what and who we are. But some are taking advantage of this freedom. The freedom to express, and decide that cause misconception among laws. The capability of a person to do a certain action is showing his ability to do it. To become a rational being is hard because we are sinners in our own way.
A philosopher once said, “I act therefore I am”. For in every action we do represent ourselves. In every action, we do we are showing who really are. In a way, we learn a thing that is morally good and evil. Temptations are rampant, entertaining, and deceiving. The temptation is what made them become criminals. We do not know them; even sometimes due process cannot prove the goodness of a person. It can only prove who the criminal is and the victim. For we know here in our country money is powerful. It takes time to earn trust and to really know a person. So it takes a long period of time to know a criminal. One should be with him all the way until he knows him. But, how can we prove that this one is innocent when we set justice in our hands. But how can the family of the sixteen years old church server Christine Silawan whose face was peeled off, exposing her skull get justice?
According to World Heath Organization the greater part of this savagery is close accomplice brutality. Around the world, very nearly 33% (30%) of ladies who have been seeing someone that they have encountered some type of physical or potentially sexual viciousness by their cozy accomplice in their lifetime.
Can the Commission on Human Rights facilitate the torment that the family feels this time caused by some uncouth and unethical human? Truly, I can say those individuals are the influence of illegal drugs, liquor and other substance. Capital punishment is a response to this sort of violation however the critical thing our legislature should address initially is itself. For how we can change other thing when we can’t change ourselves. To address unlawful the problem in drugs, first activity is to get the pusher without drug pusher tranquilize client will never again exist.
A plant without the help of other necessary things such as soil, water, daylight and carbon dioxide will die. We need to kick the bucket up to its root to assure it will never grow again. In the book in titled Applied Ethics, Macer (2017) express that farfetched hole ought to be address first for it keeps on breaking the advancement of the general public. Just nation was work for the integrity of its kin. The welfare and the wellbeing is its central objective. We are given equivalent chances to pick and experience our lives with equivalent assurance of the law. The equity framework itself is an issue. Capital punishment must serve to the individuals who truly merit. Yet, after this earthly living the Alpha and the Omega will pass judgment on us as indicated by how we carry on with this life.
Alvin Ang. (2006). Determining the Costs of Delay in the Philippine Criminal Justice System.Asia-Pacific Social Science Review.Volume 6.30-46.
Aquino hesitant to bring back death penalty: Sen Tito Sotto, in contrast, wants to revive the Death Penalty Law to prevent drug traffickers from making the country their playground”. RAPPLER.COM. Retrieved February 25, 2019. https://www.rappler.com/nation/49180-aquino-hesitant-bring-back-death-penalty.
Christopher RyanMaboloc PhD (2018). Applied Ethics: Moral Possibilities for the Contemporary World.Revised Edition.65 Salcedo Bldg., Arellano St., Davao City.Print Shoppe. 2018. 34.
Duterte on death penalty: It’s the only way to instill fear”. ABS-CBN NEWS.
Retrieved Febuary 25, 2019. @ https://news.abs-cbn.com/news/07/24/17/duterte-on-death-penalty-its-the-only-way-to-instill-fear.
In the know: Death Peanalty. May 17, 2016. Inquirer.Net. Retrieved March 11, 2019.
https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/785954/in-the-know-deathpenalty?utm_expid=.XqNwTug2W6nwDVUSgFJXedJohn Stuart Mill: Ethics. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Mariya Shcherbinina. Utilitarian Critique of Kant’s Foundations of Morality https://www.academia.edu/8139299/Utilitarian_Critique_of_Kants_Foundations_of_Morality
Lawrence L. Martin, (1997) “Jeremy Bentham: utilitarianism, public policy and the administrative state”, Journal of Management History, Vol. 3 Issue: 3, pp.272-282, https://doi.org/10.1108/13552529710181622
Thaddeus Metz, (2013). “The Meaning of Life”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2013 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2013/entries/life-meaning/>.
The Death Penalty in 2017: Facts and Figures. April 12, 2018. Retrieved March 11, 2019.https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2018/04/death-penalty-facts-and-figures-2017/
World Heath Organization: Violence against women. November 29 2017. Retrieved January 28, 2019 @ https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/violence-against-women.