Death penalty to reach SC

With Congress one step closer to reviving capital punishment, the fight of a small group of congressmen against the bill reimposing the death penalty will definitely reach the Supreme Court.

“I for one will challenge the measure before the high court, if the Senate approves it and President Duterte signs it into law,” Rep. Harry Roque of party-list group Kabayan told a news forum in Quezon City yesterday.

Catholic prelates and a group of scientists also expressed opposition to the bill, citing various reasons.

Roque said a death penalty law would be unconstitutional since the Charter prohibits the reimposition of capital punishment “unless for compelling reasons involving heinous crimes, the Congress provides for it.”

He said the reported proliferation of illegal drugs is not a compelling reason for the restoration of the death penalty.

Roque added another reason for the unconstitutionality of a death penalty law is the commitment the

country had made to at least two international treaties that it would “never reimpose capital punishment.”

He added the Constitution recognizes such treaties as part of national law.

House Bill 4727, which seeks the restoration of the death penalty, is now limited to a few drug-related offenses.

On Wednesday night, the House of Representatives approved the bill on second reading after abruptly closing the period of amendments, a decision that prevented several members from proposing changes in the measure.

Majority Leader Rodolfo Fariñas made the decision, telling his colleagues that those opposed to the bill “did not intend to present honest-togoodness perfecting amendments” and were only out to delay the proceedings.

He made the move after the House voted down three amendments proposed by opposition Rep. Edcel Lagman, who wanted the death penalty deleted from the bill and replaced with lesser punishment.

Roque and other opponents of capital punishment claim the majority railroaded the approval of the measure.

Despite this, he said he could not raise procedural issues before the SC at this time because the “high court would just treat these issues as internal to the House.”

He said there is no stopping the House majority from approving HB 4727 on third and final reading next week.

“After that, it goes to the Senate. Its approval will be the first major leadership test for Senate President Koko (Aquilino) Pimentel (III). I think he would try to have the votes for this priority bill of President Duterte,” Roque said.

Roque revealed that during Wednesday night’s deliberations, he saw several members of the Liberal Party siding with those opposed to the death penalty bill.

He said among them were Jose Christopher Belmonte and Jorge Banal of Quezon City and Kaka Bag-ao of Dinagat Islands.

“I also saw GMA during the initial part of the proceedings but she later disappeared,” he said.

He was referring to Pampanga Rep. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, who is against the death penalty. It was during her nine-year presidency that capital punishment was abolished. The former president is a deputy speaker.

Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez has warned House officers and committee chairmen that they would lose their posts if they voted against HB 4727.

Another forum guest, Rep. John Bertiz of OFW Party, said he would still vote for the measure despite its adverse repercussions on scores of overseas Filipino workers who are facing the death penalty in their host countries.

“I want to support the President on this,” he said.

Religion and science

Catholic bishops vowed to fight it out against the House to the end as they criticized the lawmakers for going against the teachings of the Catholic Church, which remains as the nation’s predominant religion.

“Today’s first reading from Deuteronomy says choose life. The legislators choose to go against the Word of God. They choose death in the name of the people,” Lipa, Batangas Archbishop Emeritus Ramon Arguelles lamented in an interview.

Manila Auxiliary Bishop Broderick Pabillo agreed. The bishops reiterated the stand of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) that the imposition of capital punishment is evil.

Arguelles stressed the proposed death penalty even only for drug related offenses is “anti-God, anti-life and anti-humanity.”

The retired archbishop further lamented how the passing of the measure came exactly at the start of the Lenten season, particularly on Ash Wednesday, which ironically should have been “the first day of conversion from evil ways.”

He cited the CBCP’s argument that the death penalty is anti-poor because only the poor drug suspects are unable to pay lawyers to defend them.

Arguelles also questioned why the lawmakers exempted plunder from heinous crimes punishable under the new measure.

“Those who plunder and use people’s money for their evil deeds ‘ legally’ elude death penalty,” he added.

While the Church’s crusade to stop the reimposition of the death penalty has suffered a major setback with the development in the House, it has no plans of giving up.

“We do not give up the fight. In life there is hope,” Pabillo stressed.

“Since we fight for life we do not lose hope. This is our resurrection faith,” he vowed.

Scientists, on the other hand, are urging legislators to clarify provisions in the proposed legislation that would impose the death penalty on several drug-related crimes, warning lawmakers against passing a measure that may criminalize legitimate acts.

“The Philippine Chemistry Society, represented by the Philippine Federation of Chemistry Societies (PFCS), strongly urges legislators to use science in drafting laws,” the federation said in a statement.

Calling the death penalty bill at the House “not scientifically rational,” the group called out the failure of the measure to define what precursor and essential chemicals are.

“The bill will criminalize legitimate users and raise the cost of goods and damage the economy,” it added.

The PFCS noted the possession of precursor or essential chemicals does not necessarily translate to possession or intent to manufacture illegal drugs.

“Virtually all precursor chemicals and essential chemicals are multiuse chemicals. Precursor chemicals may also be precursors to other important products, such as pharmaceuticals, fragrances, cosmetics, agro- chemicals and others,” the group said.

“Likewise, essential chemicals may also be essential for many other purposes, including household and health uses,” it added.

The statement was signed by PCFS president Armando Guidote, and the presidents of the four organizations under the federation: the Integrated Chemists of the Philippines, Kapisanang Kimika ng Pilipinas, Philippine Association of Chemistry Teachers and the Philippine Association of Chemistry Students.

On penalizing drug- related offenses, the bill amended various provisions of Republic Act 9165 or the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002 to include the death penalty.

It specifically stated that those who violate the provisions may face sanctions “unless authorized by law.”

The law also defines controlled precursors and essential chemicals as those identified in the 1988 United Nations Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances.

The lists include substances such as ephedrine, acetone and hydrochloric acid.

In its statement, the PFCS noted that the provisions in the proposed legislation also equate pure substances with mixtures.

“It does not distinguish a compound that is relatively pure with its presence in an essential oil or spice at one percent composition. It will criminalize possession of many medicinal plants and cooking ingredients,” it said.

The group also noted that passage of the measure may provide many opportunities for corruption.

“This topic of precursor chemicals and essential chemicals should be discussed extensively with experts in the field and with industry manufacturers,” it added.

Impact

Meanwhile, the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) said it would come up with a study on the possible impact of the passage of the death penalty bill from the perspective of international law.

“This is not a question of domestic law. This is also a question of international treaties that we are a state party to,” CHR commission Karen Gomez- Dumpit told The STAR.

She noted that the Philippines is party to various treatises, including the Second Optional Protocol of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights that provides for the abolition of capital punishment.

“We are a member of the community of nations and we have committed, in perpetuity, to abolish or to implement all efforts to abolish death penalty,” she said.

“We are going back, and that’s not something that we want to happen because that will also impact our credibility as a member-state of the United Nations… Is this the path we want to take?” Dumpit added.

Also yesterday, students from the Ateneo de Manila University ( ADMU) walked out from their classes to protest the passage of the death penalty bill on second reading.

ADMU president Fr. Jose Ramon Villarin previously issued statements vehemently opposing the reimposition of capital punishment in the country.