A fate worse than death

What is clear is that the death sentences of about 100 Death Row convicts, which have already been affirmed by the Supreme Court on automatic review, have been reduced to life imprisonment by virtue of the President’s Easter Week announcement. What is far from clear is whether the commutation applies to ALL inmates, numbering about 1,237, including those whose death sentences have not yet completed the process of automatic review by the Supreme Court.

While Justice Secretary Raul Gonzales has helpfully "clarified" that the commutation applies to all those already sentenced to death, as well as those who will be sentenced to death in the future, last time I checked, the Secretary’s pronouncements do not have the force of law. Neither are such pronouncements ex cathedra, or imbued with Papal infallibility, even if they were made on Easter Sunday.

Moreover, since, as far as we know, the Constitution of this nation has not yet been revised or amended, the provisions of Article VII, Section 19 still control, regardless of the fondest wishes of either the President or her alter ego, the good Secretary.

Finally, in light of the fact that Republic Acts Nos. 8177 and 7659 are still, to the best of our knowledge, in full force and effect, neither the President’s commutation nor the Secretary’s "clarification," may be deemed to amend, much less repeal, the said laws.

Our Constitution clearly allows the President to grant "reprieves, commutations and pardons" only AFTER "conviction by final judgment." A judgment of guilt for a capital offense, with the corresponding penalty, is not final until the judicial process is complete, including an automatic review under Article 47 of the Revised Penal Code.

All this may strike those whose death penalties are still going through automatic review as technical mumbo-jumbo. But the point is that the Constitutional requirement, for as long as it remains effective, must be observed. Besides, as the Justice Secretary himself has stressed, the death penalty has not been abolished by Congress.

Still, the heated debate over the death penalty has been revived. It is unfortunate that this round has been muddled by suspicions that GMA used her commutation power to curry favor with the Catholic Church, an arch foe of the death penalty, in order to enlist its support in her current political crisis.

I think it’s a false issue. To start with, some bishops have already made clear that the death penalty is a separate matter from all the issues underlying her political troubles. What this means is that if the commutations were meant to turn the clergy into, if not quite her avid supporters, at least her benign "critical collaborators," that effort has failed.

While the Church will undoubtedly give GMA credit for this move, it will not mark the end of her troubles with the Catholic clergy, at least those of them who believe strongly, if simplistically, that she should go, like yesterday!

Further, it’s at least curious, if not conspicuously telling, that GMA is now the third president that has seen problems with the death penalty. Cory Aquino was markedly unenthusiastic about supporting death penalty legislation for "heinous" crimes. Erap Estrada put a stop to implementation of the penalty, after its enactment into law during FVR’s tenure. There hasn’t been an application of the lethal injection during GMA’s time. She has said more than once there won’t be any executions while she’s in office.

Is this simply a lack of political will? A reluctance to confront the Catholic Church and some civil society groups on this troubling issue? Certainly, some death penalty advocates and crime victims’ groups have bitterly complained that the non-implementation of the penalty, and now the commutation of sentences, have sent the wrong messages to the criminals. They see this as positive proof that this country is not serious about fighting crime, and is prepared to open the floodgates to criminals.

Some disgruntled elements, including former President Ramos, even see a connection with the international struggle against terrorism. They regard the death penalty as an effective antidote to terrorists. I don’t know about this. In an age of suicide bombers, and accused terrorists pleading with courts to sentence them to death as their quick ticket to Paradise, this view is at least arguable.

GMA’s commutation of the death penalties of Death Row inmates is clearly not a reversal of policy on the death penalty. Thus, we shouldn’t consider this issue finally resolved or totally behind us. It most certainly is not. Whether GMA’s action will prove, in the cold light of history, to have been right or wrong should not deter us from coming to grips with this difficult dilemma.

For the hard fact is that since Republic Act No. 7659 authorized the death penalty in 1993, and since R.A. No. 8177 designated lethal injection as the method for implementing capital punishment in 1996 (and the Justice Department issued its implementing regulations in 1998), there have been no firm statistics on whether the death penalty has been an effective deterrent to crime. We have an abundance of eloquent advocacies and clever debating arguments on both sides, but hardly any data.

One problem, the death penalty adherents repeatedly argue, is that the law has not failed, it simply has not been given a chance to work. After Leo Echegaray and a couple of other hapless convicts who were dispatched to their fates in very public and highly emotional executions, the government allegedly lost heart and failed to follow through. Thus, no one can conclude with any degree of certitude whether or not the death penalty has been an effective deterrent to heinous crime.

There are those who believe, of course, that the debate goes beyond statistics and involves this society’s true regard for the value of human life and its belief in the liberating redemption of even the most lost of souls. The death penalty side rejects this as unrealistic and asks about the value of the human lives wasted by the criminals whose debt to society must be paid.

Although a true death penalty believer, I am prepared to reconsider the matter, because of harsh realities about our justice and correctional systems which have come to light. I am still not sure that the justice system captures the real criminals, or that condemning a criminal to life imprisonment is a fate worse than death.

Considering the true state of our prisons, and depending on who you are, life in prison may either not be rough enough or may be so brutal and dehumanizing as to be totally unacceptable. This case is not ripe for any final judgments.