PLUNDER IS OK NOW?
Cebu Archbishop Jose Palma laments why some lawmakers want to ease the penalty in plunder cases. Archbishop, however, still opposes plans to revive the death penalty, which the Arroyo government abolished in 2006.
Cebu Archbishop Jose Palma airs view vs. death penalty moves in House
Cebu’s prelate criticized lawmakers for supporting plans to remove the crime of plunder from the list of crimes that deserve the death penalty.
But Cebu Archbishop Jose Palma said that even though he abhors the plan, he still believes that plunderers don’t deserve death.
In an interview yesterday, Palma told reporters that while his stand against the death penalty remains the same, removing plunder will only allow plunderers to steal more.
“Kung imung tan-awon, mora’g ang ilang panglantaw nga okay ra
diay ang plunder (If you look at it, it seems they see plunder as okay),” Palma said.
But he reiterates that life imprisonment, not death penalty, is a better conviction for heinous crimes.
Palma said the rise of criminality in the country is caused by many factors, including poverty, the increasing disrespect for the law and the failure of the justice system to provide equal and speedy justice to all.
Even though various sectors are criticizing the Catholic Church for opposing the death penalty and for failing to provide an alternative, Palma believes that the problem of criminality is not theirs alone.
“It’s not a question on how we provide an alternative, but what we do as a nation so that the crimes that we fear will not happen,” he added.
While some citizens opposed Palma’s views, they agree that plunderers deserve the death penalty.
Maria Cristiana Nemencio, 26, of Barangay Mohon, Talisay City told SunStar Cebu that plunderers will continue to steal more from government coffers if plunder is not included in the death penalty.
“Dili na sila mahadlok manga
wat sa katawhan kay dili man death ang punishment (They will no longer fear stealing money from people since the punishment won’t be death),” she added.
Mark Lawrence Abellare, 35, of Barangay Guadalupe, Cebu City, said the death penalty would have served as a “Sword of Damocles” for those who are in power.
“Government officials are elected to serve the people, not for their personal gain. The inclusion of plunder in the list of crimes punishable under the death penalty strengthens that,” he added.
Last week, allies of President Rodrigo Duterte in the Lower House sought to not include plunder under the list of crimes that deserves capital punishment.
The proposed legislation identifies 21 major offenses to be punished with death through lethal injection, firing squad or hanging.
The crimes include plunder, treason, qualified piracy, murder, rape, kidnapping and serious illegal detention and dangerous drug offenses.
But during a caucus of members of the “supermajority” last Wednesday, an agreement was reached to exclude some crimes from the list, including plunder.
Views
Cebu City congressmen have mixed opinions on the majority bloc’s decision to take out plunder from the list of crimes punishable by death under House Bill 4727.
House Speaker Pantaleon Alva- rez said the majority decided not to touch plunder anymore since the law is imposing capital punishment.
This would mean that judges are instead given the option to punish perpetrators of heinous crimes with either life imprisonment or death.
In a text message to SunStar Cebu yesterday, Rep. Raul del Mar (North District, Cebu City) said he is not for the imposition of a death penalty as a whole.
“I am against the death penalty, period. Meaning, that my capital punishment for heinous crimes is life imprisonment, not death,” he said.
Rep. Rodrigo “Bebot” Abellanosa (South District), on the other hand, lamented that plunder should be included in the list of crimes punishable by death.
“If I am to agree to the re-imposition of the death penalty, plun-
Kung imong tan-awn, mora’g ang ilang panglantaw nga okay ra ang plunder. CEBU ARCHBISHOP JOSE PALMA
der should be included as one of the heinous crimes punishable by such,” he said.
While it may not be plunder, the Ombudsman-Visayas ordered Abellanosa dismissed from public service in November 2014 after he was found guilty of grave misconduct for his involvement in the City Government’s scholarship program, which benefited two schools he owns.
He, however, was able to run and eventually win in the 2016 May polls as the Ombudsman only raised the matter to the Commission on Elections, and not to the Court of Appeals.