should death penalty be legal in the philippines essay

Username or Email Address

Remember Me

Exploring the Death Penalty in the Philippines Essay

Is the death penalty truly an effective deterrent to crime? And what are the ramifications of its application in the Philippines ? Join us as we delve into the controversial topic of capital punishment in the Philippines , examining its history, legal implications, and impact on human rights.

The Philippines made history in 1987 when it became the first Asian country in modern times to abolish the death penalty for all crimes. However, in 1993, it was reintroduced for “heinous” crimes due to public fear and frustration at increasing rates of violent crime. Today, there are more than 400 people on Death Row in the Philippines, making it one of the countries with the highest sentencing rates in the world.

Key Takeaways:

• The death penalty was abolished in the Philippines in 1987 but reintroduced in 1993 for “heinous” crimes.
• The country has one of the highest sentencing rates in the world, with over 400 people on Death Row.
• Arguments against the death penalty include doubts about its deterrent effect and concerns about fairness in trials.
• Studies have shown that the death penalty does not act as a greater deterrent to crime compared to other forms of punishment.
• The international community opposes the death penalty, and the Philippines risks violating its human rights obligations if it reinstates it.

The Legal and Human Rights Context

In 1987, the Philippines promulgated a Constitution with a Bill of Rights, solidifying its commitment to upholding human rights. This important document established an independent Commission on Human Rights and affirmed the country’s dedication to international human rights norms by acceding to major human rights treaties.

However, the reintroduction of the death penalty in the Philippines raises significant concerns regarding human rights violations. The right to life and the prohibition of cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment or punishment are fundamental human rights principles that must be protected.

There have been troubling allegations of torture and ill-treatment used to extract confessions, which not only violates human rights but also poses a grave risk of judicial error. These practices undermine the integrity and fairness of the criminal justice system, casting doubt on the credibility of its outcomes.

Furthermore, public doubts persist regarding the equity, impartiality, and effectiveness of the judicial system as a whole. Disparities in access to justice and the unequal treatment of individuals based on their socio-economic status undermine the principles of equality and fairness under the law.

In upholding human rights in the Philippines , it is crucial to critically assess the impact of the death penalty on both the constitutional framework and the broader human rights landscape of the country.

Arguments Against the Death Penalty

Opponents of the death penalty in the Philippines present compelling arguments that challenge its efficacy and fairness in the criminal justice system. These arguments shed light on the flaws and potential injustices associated with capital punishment.

1. Lack of Deterrence

One of the key arguments against the death penalty is that it does not act as a greater deterrent to crime compared to other forms of punishment. Research has shown that the threat of execution does not significantly reduce crime rates. Instead, addressing the root causes of criminal behavior and implementing effective rehabilitation programs have been proven to be more successful in reducing recidivism.

2. Risk of Wrongful Convictions

Another critical concern with the death penalty is the inherent risk of miscarriages of justice. No criminal justice system is immune from errors, and wrongful convictions can and do occur. Once a person is executed, there is no opportunity for exoneration if new evidence or factual errors come to light. This irrevocability magnifies the importance of ensuring fair trials and avoiding irreversible mistakes.

3. Disproportionate Impact on Disadvantaged Sectors

Advocates against the death penalty argue that it disproportionately affects disadvantaged sectors of society, exacerbating inequality before the law. Studies have shown that individuals from marginalized communities, who often lack access to quality legal representation, are more likely to receive harsher sentences, including the death penalty. This systemic bias raises concerns about fairness and equal treatment under the law.

“The death penalty fails to address the root causes of crime and perpetuates a system that disproportionately impacts vulnerable individuals and communities.” – Human Rights Watch

Promoting alternatives to capital punishment that focus on rehabilitation, reform, and addressing societal inequalities could lead to a more just and equitable criminal justice system.

These arguments challenge the effectiveness, fairness, and justice of the death penalty in the Philippines. Considering these concerns is crucial in promoting a criminal justice system that upholds human rights, equality, and the pursuit of genuine justice.

Impact on Crime Levels

Contrary to popular belief, the death penalty does not have a significant impact on reducing crime levels or enhancing the security of law-abiding citizens. Numerous studies conducted in various countries have consistently shown that there is no evidence to support the notion that the death penalty acts as a greater deterrent to criminals than other forms of punishment. Instead, several underlying factors contribute to the root causes of criminal behavior.

The Real Factors Fueling Criminality

Factors such as poverty, social inequality, unemployment, and the weakening of social control methods play a much larger role in fueling criminality. Socioeconomic disparities and lack of access to basic needs often lead individuals towards criminal activities . Addressing these fundamental issues and implementing effective social and economic policies can have a more significant impact on crime reduction and the overall well-being of society.

“The death penalty doesn’t solve the issues of crime; it merely masks the underlying societal problems that need to be addressed.” – Dr. Maria Santos, Criminologist

Statistics on Death Penalty and Crime Rates

Let’s examine the statistics on death penalty implementation and crime rates in several countries:

As seen in the table above, the data does not support the argument that the death penalty leads to lower crime rates. In fact, countries with abolished death penalty have shown low to moderate crime rates, while countries that retain the death penalty exhibit varying levels of crime rates.

The statistics clearly indicate that the death penalty is not a reliable tool for crime prevention. To ensure a safer society, it is crucial to address the root causes of crime and implement comprehensive social and economic reforms that uplift communities and provide opportunities for all individuals.

Concerns about Fair Trials

The rapid rate of death sentences in the Philippines is taking place within a context of public doubts over the equity, impartiality, and effectiveness of the judicial system. There is a perception that those with influence or wealth can enjoy impunity, while those from disadvantaged sectors of society face disadvantage in the criminal justice system. Safeguards to ensure fair trials, including the right to competent legal counsel, are not consistently upheld.

Historical Use of the Death Penalty

The history of the death penalty in the Philippines is a complex and evolving one. Capital punishment has been a part of the country’s criminal justice system during different periods of its history.

Under Spanish rule, the Spanish Codigo Penal of 1848, which was introduced in the Philippines in 1884, included several capital offenses such as treason, piracy, and murder. During this time, the death penalty was carried out through methods such as firing squad and garrote.

Following the introduction of internal self-government in 1934 and full independence in 1946, there were changes in the application of the death penalty. The newly established Philippine government sought to reform the criminal justice system, and discussions on the abolition of the death penalty emerged.

However, in more recent times, the death penalty was reintroduced in the Philippines in 1993 for “heinous” crimes, due to public fear and increasing rates of violent crime. Today, the country grapples with a high number of individuals on Death Row and ongoing debates on the efficacy and ethics of capital punishment.

International Human Rights Obligations

The Philippines ratified the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in 2007, which requires countries to abolish the death penalty. Reinstating the death penalty would violate the country’s obligations under international human rights law and could result in consequences from foreign trade partners. The international community, including human rights organizations like Human Rights Watch, opposes the death penalty.

Current Situation and Government Stance

The Duterte administration in the Philippines has publicly supported the reinstatement of the death penalty. This stance aligns with President Rodrigo Duterte’s tough-on-crime approach, particularly in addressing drug offenses. Currently, the House Committee on Justice is deliberating on bills that propose the reintroduction of capital punishment, specifically through lethal injection.

President Duterte’s controversial “war on drugs” has already resulted in thousands of deaths attributed to both the police and unidentified assailants. With the government’s overwhelming majority in Congress, it is likely that the death penalty bills will gain support and further progress in the legislative process.

“We need to bring back the death penalty to instill fear, to deter, to prevent crime,” President Duterte said during his 2020 State of the Nation Address.

The government’s position on the death penalty reflects its determination to tackle crime effectively and send a strong message about the consequences of engaging in illegal activities . However, this stance has drawn criticism and concerns from human rights advocates, who argue that capital punishment can lead to violations of the right to life and may exacerbate issues of judicial fairness and errors.

As the debate on the reintroduction of the death penalty continues, it is essential to consider the potential impact on human rights, the criminal justice system, and the broader social fabric of the Philippines.

Risks and Impact on Human Rights

Reimposing the death penalty in the Philippines would worsen the human rights situation and lead to further violations. It would perpetuate the government’s “war on drugs” and increase bloodshed. The rights-violating abyss that the country would descend into cannot be overstated.

“The death penalty contradicts the right to life and the prohibition of cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment or punishment. It puts at risk the fundamental principles of justice and fairness,” – International Federation for Human Rights

Reinstating capital punishment would undermine the Philippines’ credibility and leverage to negotiate on behalf of its citizens facing execution abroad. The government’s recent withdrawal from the International Criminal Court, coupled with the potential reintroduction of the death penalty, places the country on a dangerous path towards becoming an international human rights pariah.

The death penalty in the Philippines is a complex issue that raises serious questions about human rights and the fairness of the judicial system. Arguments against the death penalty emphasize concerns regarding its efficacy as a deterrent, the potential for wrongful convictions, and its disproportionate impact on marginalized communities. Furthermore, reintroducing the death penalty would violate the country’s international human rights obligations.

The opposition to capital punishment is not confined to the Philippines alone; the international community, including prominent human rights organizations like Human Rights Watch, rejects the death penalty as a violation of fundamental human rights. Restoring the death penalty would not only damage the Philippines’ standing in the global community but also hinder its ability to advocate for its citizens facing execution abroad.

It is important to consider the government’s stance on the death penalty, particularly in the context of the ongoing “war on drugs” initiated by President Rodrigo Duterte. The administration’s support for capital punishment, combined with the alarming number of extrajudicial killings and human rights abuses, raises concerns about the state of human rights in the country. Reimposing the death penalty would exacerbate these issues and further undermine the Philippines’ credibility as a protector of human rights.

In conclusion, the death penalty in the Philippines should be critically examined in light of its potential ramifications for human rights and the judicial system. The arguments against capital punishment, the opposition from the international community, and the questionable human rights situation within the country all contribute to the conclusion that reinstating the death penalty would be a regressive step that contradicts the principles of justice and human rights.

What is the current status of the death penalty in the Philippines?

What are the main arguments against the death penalty in the philippines, does the death penalty have a significant impact on reducing crime levels, are fair trials guaranteed in the judicial system of the philippines, what is the historical use of the death penalty in the philippines, does the philippines have international human rights obligations regarding the death penalty, what is the government’s stance on the death penalty in the philippines, what are the risks and impact of reinstating the death penalty in the philippines, what is the conclusion regarding the death penalty in the philippines, source links.

• https://www.kibin.com/essay-examples/an-argument-against-the-re-imposition-of-the-death-penalty-in-the-philippines-Yy0RFsgW
• https://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6a99f4.html
• https://www.hrw.org/news/2020/08/05/death-penalty-danger-philippines

Hello! I'm Wise, a Filipina with a deep love for my country and a passion for sharing its beauty with the world. As a writer, blogger, and videographer, I capture the essence of the Philippines through my eyes, hoping to give foreign visitors a true taste of what makes these islands so special.

From the vibrant streets of Manila to the tranquil beaches of Palawan, my journey is about uncovering the hidden gems and everyday wonders that define the Filipino spirit. My articles and blogs are not just travel guides; they are invitations to explore, to feel, and to fall in love with the Philippines, just as I have.

Through my videos, I strive to bring the sights, sounds, and stories of my homeland to life. Whether it's the local cuisine, the colorful festivals, or the warm smiles of the people, I aim to prepare visitors for an authentic experience.

For those seeking more than just a vacation, the Philippines can be a place of discovery and, perhaps, even love. My goal is to be your guide, not just to the places you'll visit, but to the experiences and connections that await in this beautiful corner of the world. Welcome to the Philippines, through my eyes. Let's explore together!

You may also like

US Ambassador to the Philippines: Vital Role & Impact

Navigating Unemployment Issues In The Philippines

Ending Violence Against Women in the Philippines

Add comment, cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Want Flight, Hotel, and Restaurant Discounts for Your Philippines Trip? Join Below!

Email address:

Buy Me a Coffee

In Defense of the Right to Life: International Law and Death Penalty in the Philippines

Background to the death penalty in the Philippines

The Philippines first abolished the death penalty under the 1987 Constitution. It was the first Asian country to abolish the death penalty for all crimes. [4] Following this abolition, all death sentences were reduced to reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment.

During the early part of former President Fidel Ramos’ administration, the death penalty was re-imposed by virtue of R.A. No. 7659, which was passed in December 1993. A convict, Leo Echagaray, was executed in February 1999, followed by six other executions for various allegedly heinous crimes. However, notwithstanding the re-imposition of the death penalty, national crime rate increased by 15.3 percent or a total of 82,538 (from 71,527 recorded crimes in the previous year). [5]

Subsequently, President Joseph Estrada declared a de facto moratorium on executions. President Gloria Arroyo lifted the de facto moratorium on 05 December 2003 “to sow fear into the hearts of criminals.” [6] Although executions were set to resume on January 2004, the administration in fact issued reprieves on any scheduled executions. [7] At the same time, the Supreme Court decided to reopen the Lara-Licayan case. [8] The Court admitted newly-discovered evidence, which exonerated both Lara and Licayan from culpability. [9]

The Philippines ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) on 23 October 1986. Ratification of the ICCPR reinforced the commitment of the Philippines to promote and protect civil and political rights, including the right to life enshrined in Article 6 of the Covenant.

In 2006, the Philippines signed the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Second Optional Protocol). On 20 November 2007, the Philippines ratified the Second Optional Protocol. The Second Optional Protocol prohibits, absolutely and permanently, the imposition of the death penalty in the Philippines. [10]

Notwithstanding these binding legal commitments, House Bill No. 4727, is now before the House of Representatives, following approval by the House Justice Committee on 7 December 2016. Amendments to the Bill were the subject of vote in March 2017.

In the Senate, Senate Bill Nos. 4, 42, 185, 186, 187, 889, 985, and 1294 are under the consideration of the Committee on Justice and Human Rights. Further consideration of the Senate Bills are suspended as of writing pending consideration by officials of the effect of relevant international agreements ratified by the Philippines and other international obligations.

• Subscribe Now

FAST FACTS: Death penalty in the world and in the Philippines

Already have Rappler+? Sign in to listen to groundbreaking journalism.

This is AI generated summarization, which may have errors. For context, always refer to the full article.

MANILA, Philippines – At least 28,670 persons around the world are facing the death penalty, according to Amnesty International.

The World Coalition Against the Death Penalty marks October 10 as the World Day Against the Death Penalty, in an effort to encourage governments around the world to reconsider the use of capital punishment as a means to deter heinous crimes.

Celebrating its 20th year , the 170-organization-strong movement also advocates against the inhumane means and treatments used against people on death row. “The World Day will be dedicated to reflecting on the relationship between the use of the death penalty and torture or other cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment or punishment,” the group said.

Global statistics

Amnesty International recorded 579 executions in 18 countries last 2021. China continues to be the country with the most executions, estimated to be in the thousands, but exact numbers are kept under lock and key. North Korea and Vietnam’s number of executions are also being hidden.

Belarus, Japan, and the UAE resumed executions last 2021, while India, Qatar, and Taiwan did not have any executions that year. The countries of Sierra Leone, Kazakhstan, and Malaysia have abolished the death penalty. Papua New Guinea abolished it once more – it had done so in 1974, reinstated it in 1991, before abolishing it last January 2022.

Death penalty in the Philippines

Capital punishment in the country dates back to the Spanish colonial era. Figures like national hero Jose Rizal, as well as Filipino Catholic priests Mariano Gomez, José Burgos, and Jacinto Zamora (GomBurZa), were executed by firing squad and garrote, respectively.

The electric chair was introduced as a method of execution during the period of American colonialization. After gaining independence in 1946, a total of six presidents have had executions during their term, namely: Elpidio Quirino (13), Ramon Magsaysay (6), Carlos Garcia (14), Diosdado Macapagal (2), Ferdinand E. Marcos (32), and Joseph Estrada (7).

The administration of Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo commuted the sentences of at least 1,230 death row inmates on April 15, 2006, a number considered by Amnesty International to be the largest ever. Republic Act 9346 was then signed on June 24, 2006, abolishing the death penalty in the Philippines. Life imprisonment and reclusion perpetua took its place.

Leo Echegaray was the last person to be served the death penalty in the Philippines in 1999 when he was executed via lethal injection. He was convicted for the rape of 10-year-old Rodessa Echegaray

On death row

Despite the lifting of the death penalty in the country, there are Filipinos abroad who are awaiting execution.

The most prominent among the convicted is Mary Jane Veloso, a domestic worker in Indonesia who was arrested and convicted in 2010 for drug trafficking. She was granted a last-minute stay of execution to act as a witness against her human trafficker. She has yet to testify due to delays caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.

According to the United States Death Penalty Information Center , as of October 2021, there are two Filipinos on death row, awaiting execution: Sonny Enraca for the fatal shooting of an actor in 1999 and Ralph Simon Jeremias also for the fatal shooting of two men in 2009. Two other Filipinos in Abu Dhabi were handed the death sentence for possession and sale of illegal drugs and substances last January 2022.

Administrative moves for reinstatement

Former president Rodrigo Duterte was vocal about wanting to reinstate the death penalty during his term, saying that it is a fitting punishment for heinous crimes. 

Former UN Human Rights commissioner Zeid bin Ra’ad al-Hussein, however, wrote to then-House speaker Pantaleon Alvarez and then-Senate president Aquilino “Koko” Pimentel III in 2016, telling them that a state that has signed or acceded to the United Nations Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, is not allowed by international law to denounce it or withdraw from it.

“When a State ratifies the Second Optional Protocol to ICCPR, it guarantees that no one can be executed within its jurisdiction,” he said.

The House of Representatives passed House Bill No. 7814 last March 2021, which allows the presumption of guilt for those involved in illegal drugs. The death penalty is the maximum punishment that can be meted out to sentenced persons.

Public opinion on the death penalty

In a 2018 Social Weather Stations report on public perceptions of the death penalty, less than half of Filipinos demanded the use of the death penalty for serious drug-related crimes.

A study concluded in 2020 by the Commission on Human Rights showed that despite 6 out of 10 Filipinos showing moderate support for the death penalty, 7 out of 10 chose restorative methods of justice when presented with alternative punishments. Only 3 out of 10 Filipinos strongly support the death penalty, the study said. – with reports from Pauline Regalario/Rappler.com

Add a comment

Please abide by Rappler's commenting guidelines .

There are no comments yet. Add your comment to start the conversation.

How does this make you feel?

Related Topics

Recommended stories, {{ item.sitename }}, {{ item.title }}, human rights, [opinion] ‘some people need killing’.

[Judgment Call] Resisting mob mentality for warrantless arrests

The whistleblower

Philippines joins biggest case vs climate change, tells court ‘polluters must pay’

European Union, UN criticize new Hong Kong security law

Checking your Rappler+ subscription...

Upgrade to Rappler+ for exclusive content and unlimited access.

Why is it important to subscribe? Learn more

You are subscribed to Rappler+

• فارسى
• Français
• Español
• عربي

International Federation for Human Rights

Plans to reinstate the death penalty must be abandoned.

• Death Penalty

(Paris, Manila) Philippine parliamentarians must shelve proposed draft legislation aimed at reinstating the death penalty in the country’s legal system, FIDH and its member organization Philippine Alliance of Human Rights Advocates (PAHRA) urged today. The Philippines abolished capital punishment for all crimes in 2006.

“Legislators must resist the temptation to conclude that the restoration of the death penalty will provide an effective tool to combat crime. Their job is to ensure that new laws comply with international treaties that the Philippines has ratified.”

On 9 November, the House of Representatives’ subcommittee on judicial reforms began discussing seven bills that seek to re-impose the death penalty for so-called ‘heinous crimes’ - a broad, unclear, and ill-defined notion, not a legal category. As of 6 September 2016, members of the Congress had introduced at least 16 bills to either repeal existing legislation that prohibited the death penalty or make a number of crimes punishable by death.

As for the executive branch, President Rodrigo Duterte, elected on 9 May 2016, has vowed to reinstate the death penalty for a wide range of crimes, with a particular focus on crimes involving drugs. Other crimes for which Duterte said the death penalty would be reinstated include rape, robbery, and kidnapping that resulted in the victims’ death.

Enacting legislation to reinstate the death penalty is inconsistent with the Philippines’ obligations under international law, namely the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the Second Optional Protocol to the ICCPR, aiming at the abolition of the death penalty. The Philippines is a state party to both human rights instruments.

Article 6 of the ICCPR guarantees every human being’s “inherent right to life.” In addition, it prescribes that in countries that have not abolished capital punishment, the death penalty may be imposed only for the “most serious crimes,” a threshold that international jurisprudence has repeatedly stated drug-related offenses do not meet. The Second Optional Protocol to the ICCPR imposes an obligation on state parties to the convention to refrain from carrying out executions. In addition, the UN Human Rights Committee has affirmed that state parties cannot denounce or withdraw from the ICCPR or its Second Optional Protocol.  [ 1 ]

“In addition to promoting an atmosphere of vigilantism that has led to the unlawful killing of thousands of Filipinos in the name of the war on drugs, President Duterte’s administration has backed the reinstatement of state-sanctioned killing. It’s time for lawmakers to push back against such folly and reaffirm respect for human rights and the rule of law as the only way forward.”

FIDH and PAHRA call on the Philippines to respect its international legal obligations by dropping the proposed bills aimed at the reintroduction of the death penalty. FIDH and PAHRA also urge the Philippines to vote in favor of the upcoming UN General Assembly (UNGA) resolution – due to be voted on in December 2016 – that calls for a moratorium on executions.

FIDH, a member of the World Coalition Against the Death Penalty (WCADP), reiterates its total opposition to the death penalty for all crimes and in all circumstances.

THE DEATH PENALTY: CRIMINALITY, JUSTICE AND HUMAN RIGHTS

This document contains some information and recommendations on the Death Penalty which was restored by the Philippines Government in December 1993. The organization urges the President of the Philippines to exercise clemency in the case of those death row prisoners whose sentences have been confirmed by the Supreme Court and to commute their sentences.

DOWNLOAD PDF

PGA’s vision is to contribute to the creation of a Rules-Based International Order for a more equitable, safe, sustainable and democratic world.

Philippines and the Death Penalty

Although the Philippines was the first Asian country to abolish the death penalty under the 1987 Constitution, it was re-imposed during the administration of President Fidel Ramos to address the rising crime rate in 1993, only to be abolished again in 2006, after the then President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo signed a law reducing maximum punishment to life imprisonment. The country subsequently signed and ratified the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, aiming at the abolition of the death penalty (ICCPR-OP2) on 20 November 2007.

The May 2016 election of President Rodrigo Duterte, who vowed to reintroduce the death penalty to combat drug trafficking in the Philippines and other crimes during his campaign, posed a new serious threat to the protection of human rights in the country. On 7 March 2017, the House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed Bill No. 4727 on the reinstatement of the death penalty for drug-related and “heinous” crimes. The Bill, however, remained stalled in the Senate for the following months due to a lack of support from Senators, including several PGA Members who publicly spoke out against the reintroduction of capital punishment in the country.

Yet, the mid-term elections of May 2019, which gave a majority to senators from President Duterte’s party (PDP-Laban), relaunched the pro-death penalty movement, and 18 concerning bills on this matter were presented to the House of Representatives in September that same year. Although unsuccessful, other attempts were made again in 2020, following a shooting in Tarlac .

On 2 March 2021, the House of Representatives adopted House Bill No. 7814 , allowing the reintroduction of the death penalty under the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002 – the second bill in five years proposing a return to capital punishment that passed to the Senate. But support from Senators who previously positioned themselves in favor of such reinstatement diminished, thus reducing the risk of a return to the use of capital punishment.

Overall, vigilance must prevail, notably considering the coming to power of Ferdinand ‘Bongbong’ Marcos Junior as President and Sara Duterte as Vice President following the presidential elections of May 2022. The threat of a possible reintroduction of the death penalty in the Philippines remains latent.

The Philippines has ratified both the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) in 1986 and its Second Optional Protocol aiming at the abolition of the death penalty (ICCPR-OP2) in 2007 .

PGA activities on the abolition of the death penalty in the country:

30-31 October 2018:  PGA organised, in partnership with ADPAN and Ensemble contre la peine de mort (ECPM), a regional parliamentary seminar entitled “Standing Against Death Penalty in Asia: The Role of Parliamentarians ” in Kuala Lumpur (Malaysia). Hon. Tomasito Villarin , Member of the House of Representatives of the Philippines, attended the event and gave an intervention on the experience of the Philippines with the death penalty, including recent efforts to block its reintroduction.

29 November 2017:  PGA organized a side-event to its 39 th  Annual Forum in Milan (Italy), entitled  “Moving Away from Capital Punishment in Asia” . The event focused on the issues and arguments particularly relevant to the abolitionist movement in Asian countries. This gave the opportunity to PGA Member  Sen. Antonio Trillanes  to share his experience with fellow Asian parliamentarians and discuss how to best act against the reintroduction of the death penalty in abolitionist countries.

16 October 2017:  PGA issued a  statement  welcoming the move by nine of the twenty-four Filipino Senators, including PGA Members  Sen. Antonio Trillanes  and  Sen. Leila de Lima , to speak out against the government’s move to reintroduce the death penalty in the country, which led to the relevant Committee to defer its discussion of the bill. Sen. Trillanes also published a  statement .

Parliamentary Guidebook on the Abolition of the Death Penalty

English Français

Factsheet for Parliamentarians Death Penalty and Poverty

Parliamentary Factsheet on the Death Penalty and Terrorism-Related Offences

English Français العَرَبِيَّة‎

Parliamentary Factsheet on the Death Penalty and Mental Health

The Federal Register

The daily journal of the united states government, request access.

Due to aggressive automated scraping of FederalRegister.gov and eCFR.gov, programmatic access to these sites is limited to access to our extensive developer APIs.

If you are human user receiving this message, we can add your IP address to a set of IPs that can access FederalRegister.gov & eCFR.gov; complete the CAPTCHA (bot test) below and click "Request Access". This process will be necessary for each IP address you wish to access the site from, requests are valid for approximately one quarter (three months) after which the process may need to be repeated.

An official website of the United States government.

If you want to request a wider IP range, first request access for your current IP, and then use the "Site Feedback" button found in the lower left-hand side to make the request.