Should Capital Punishment Be Implemented Today?

Photo by Tingey Injury Law Firm on Unsplash

There have been a lot of discussions about the legality of capital punishment and whether it is even a humane way of administering penal justice. In the Philippines, it's a hotly debated topic especially during the former Pres. Duterte's term because he was a stalwart proponent of it. Apparently, the current Philippine Pres. Ferdinand Marcos Jr. is undecided on whether to reimpose the death penalty in the Philippines, because he believes that it's not an effective method to curb crime rate in the country.

I think there are merits to implementing the death penalty in a country, but I also think there are certain dangers around it. I think the state should implement the death penalty, but they must strictly abide by guidelines on which cases where the death penalty should be considered. For example, serial killers or serial rapists need to be put to death. And the state has the authority to do that.

I believe there is a precedent for the death penalty as well. The Bible actually gives credence to it. Capital punishment was given to the government as a means of punishing grievous sins. In the Noadic covenant, in Genesis 9:6, God institutes capital punishment for governments. It says, "Whoever sheds human blood, by humans shall their blood be shed, for in the image of God has God made mankind." This is the guardrail by which governments can keep law and order in their society.

Some people might point to the fact that we are in a period of God's grace, so we must extend grace to others even though they have wronged us. And that is true, on a personal level. But on the level of a state or a government, God has given government the sword to exact justice. They are the ones whom God has mandated or ordained to be the peacekeepers to maintain law and order in society. Therefore, they should have the right to exercise that authority. But again, I think there should be proper and strict guidelines as to which cases.

We can't have just anybody being executed by the state simply for petty theft or let's say adultery, or fraud. Heinous crimes such as murder, rape, and other violent acts should be considered for capital punishment. I think these are the only cases that warrant capital punishment because one is taking the life of another, and the other is committing a violent act against women, mostly women but it can also apply to men.

What about accidents? I think those cases wherein a life has been taken but are unintentional can definitely be considered for imprisonment, but I don't think it's as serious as murder which has the element of premeditation or intent. So, with these, monetary reparations to the injured party as well as several years in prison would be a just punishment. By accidents, the one scenario I have in mind is a car accident which would be gross negligence, and if somebody dies, then it's gross negligence leading to homicide or manslaughter.

How about acts of self-defense? I think that can be pardoned, if it truly was self-defense and the life of the surviving person was truly under threat by the deceased. Perhaps, this can be decided with some monetary settlement and a few years in prison, and community service. I'm not exactly sure about the legal procedures and the penalties being imposed in practice, but I think these are reasonable at the very least. Since taking a life is a serious thing, we should be cautious in dealing with such cases.

Still, the fact of the matter is that capital punishment is a justifiable means of exacting punishment for serious crimes. Whether a government implements it or not, is up to the leaders of that nation, but if they do, then they have the right to do so.