thecountries of Europe and Canada which do not use death penalty. Further studies showwhich could be found in a public faith, a social witness authored by National Council of Churches in the Philippines Amnesty International group 204, Sweden section, Letter toBishop La Verne Mercado, dated August 22, 1989: Dr. Roger Hood from OxfordUniversity found that the number of Homicides in several countries including Canada,Australia and Jamaica have stayed the same or even fallen after the abolition of death penalty. Sociologically speaking, the Amnesty International arrive to a conclusion thatfactors like education, unemployment and poverty are more relevant in crime causationrather than the absence of death penalty.2 nd Point: THERE IS ALWAYS A POSIBILITY OF ERROR IN CONDEMNING APERSON TO DEATHThe death penalty alone imposes irrevocable sentence, once an inmate is executed,nothing can be done to make amends if a mistake have been made. It is impossible to pardon a corpse. Amnesty International interviewed inmates in the Philippines and theywere surprised to find out that illegal methods including planting of evidences, and theuse of ill treatments and torture to secure confessions from criminal suspects. In one case,involving Eusebio Molijan, sentenced to death for multiple murder during an attemptedrobbery in 1950 and executed by electrocution in 1958, there remains concern, that hemay have been falsely convicted. Eusebio Molijan was convicted on the strength of awritten confession which he retracted during his trial, saying he had been punched in thestomach and beaten by a piece of wood by police to force him to confess. He alsoclaimed he has been forced against his will to participate in the robbery and that another man had planned and carried out the murders. The Supreme Court
acknowledged thatthere was insufficient evidence to prove that Molijan was the instigator of the crime, buthis death sentence was confirmed. Not only Eusebio Molijar is the victim of injustice, as well as:Fernando Galera – 26 years old, fish vendor, innocent but sentenced to death because hecant afford to pay competent lawyers (4/1994)Richard Ong – 33, innocent who was sentenced to death in (12/1994) 8/1996. He wastortured and confessed something which he didn’t do.Hideshi Suzuki – 38, Japanese man sentenced to death in 12/1994 because of marijuanatrafficking. H claimed that the marijuana were planted on him by a police officer. Those are a few of the many cases which proves that the judicial system in thePhilippines is sometimes inefficient, unfair, unjust and imperfect which should be given priority and to strengthen.3 rd Point: THE STATE HAS NO RIGHT TO DEPRIVE A PERSON OF HIS LIFE; GODIS THE GIVER OF LIFE AND ONLY HE CAN TAKE IT.In the book A Public Faith, a Social Witness authored by the NCCP, According to theUnited Methodist Church General Conference, “We cannot accept retribution or socialvengeance as a reason for taking a life . It violates our deepest belief in God as the creator and the redeemer of human life. In this respect, there can be no assertion that human lifecan take humanely by the state. Indeed, in the long run, the use of death penalty by thestate will increase the
You've reached the end of your free preview.
Want to read all 74 pages?
- Fall '19