Press Release
August 6, 2019

Sen. Emmanuel D. Pacquiao
Privilege Speech | SBN 189: Death Penalty for Drug Trafficking & Manufacturing

Mr. President, fellow legislators, my beloved countrymen, good afternoon. Despite all the global and local challenges that we are facing, it is still a good afternoon. We are still here and we have not given up on doing what we are called to do. As I rise on a matter of personal and collective privilege on matters of public concern, I would like to express my gratitude for the opportunity to work with all of you. Our collective mission is to serve our people and protect our country.

During the 17th Congress, I filed Senate Bill No. 185: "AN ACT TO IMPOSE THE DEATH PENALTY AND INCREASED PENALTIES ON CERTAIN HEINOUS CRIMES INVOLVING DANGEROUS DRUGS, AMENDING FOR THAT PURPOSE OTHER SPECIAL PENAL LAWS, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES".

On August 8, 2016, I delivered my first privilege speech calling for the restoration of the death penalty. The debates on the committee level did not take off because of various factors.

This 18th Congress, I filed Senate Bill No. 189: "AN ACT IMPOSING DEATH PENALTY AND INCREASED PENALTIES ON CERTAIN HEINOUS CRIMES WHICH INVOLVES MANUFACTURING AND TRAFFICKING OF DANGEROUS DRUGS, AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE OTHER SPECIAL PENAL LAWS, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES."

Mr. President, I am one with Senator Ping Lacson, Senator Bong Go, and Senator Ronald Dela Rosa, in calling for the reimposition of death penalty as expressed in the bills that we have respectively filed.

Mr. President, I firmly believe that the government has been given the authority to rule over our people. As a Christian, I subscribe to what the Bible says about SUBMISSION TO GOVERNING AUTHORITIES.

Mr. President, I can cite Bible verses to support my stand, but let me make this very clear: THE FOCUS OF OUR DEBATE ON THE REIMPOSITION OF DEATH PENALTY SHOULD BE ON THE BASIS OF ITS CONSTITUTIONALITY.

Let me reiterate the lines from the speech of Senator Arturo Tolentino on February 2, 1993, and I quote, "It is my purpose to discuss the question of imposing the death penalty not on general principle, not under Divine Law or religious dogma, not under moral or philosophical considerations, but simply and specifically in the light of the Constitution." End of quote.

Kaya ang tanong: NAAAYON BA SA KONSTITUSYON ANG MULING PAGPATAW NG PARUSANG KAMATAYAN?

Mr. President, the 1987 Constitution never abolished the death penalty. Kung babalikan natin ang naging deliberasyon ng mga miyembro ng 1986 Constitutional Commission, malinaw ang kanilang naging consensus: ipaubaya na lamang sa lehislatura ang desisyon kung pahihintulutan o ipagbabawal ang pagpataw ng parusang kamatayan.

Our prevailing Constitution reserved the imposition of the capital punishment for offenses so abhorrent to orderly society. This means after the requirements of due trial and exhaustive review are complied with, death penalty may be imposed by the authority with jurisdiction on certain offenses which, based on good faith and best judgment of Congress had qualified as heinous crimes. Thus, Section 19, Article 3 of the 1987 Constitution now reads, and I quote: "Excessive fines shall not be imposed, nor cruel degrading or inhuman punishment inflicted. Neither shall death penalty be imposed, unless, for compelling reasons involving heinous crimes the Congress hereafter provides for it." End of quote.

Mr. President, at this point, let us examine the meaning of the qualifier used by our forefathers: heinous. The word is taken from the old French word "haine" which means "hatred." Through times, it was used to define things and circumstances that are abominable or totally reprehensible. Heinous. Kasuklam-suklam.

Section 19, Article III of the Constitution was crafted in such a way that the Commissioners did not completely foreclose the possibility that THE NEEDS OF THE TIME MAY CHANGE AND MAY WARRANT THE IMPOSITION OF THE CAPITAL PUNISHMENT. In our forefathers' mind, "the temper and condition of the times change." Hence, they left it to us - the elected representatives of the people in Congress - to assess our current situation and determine whether we find compelling reasons to reinstate the death penalty to protect and preserve our nation.

"HEINOUS" crimes have already been defined and identified under Republic Act No. 7659 or "An Act to Impose Death Penalty on Certain Heinous Crimes," which was enacted on December 13, 1993. As provided in its Whereas Clause, "The crimes punishable by death under this Act are heinous for being grievous, odious and hateful offenses and which, by reason of their inherent or manifest wickedness, viciousness, atrocity and perversity are repugnant and outrageous to the common standards and norms of decency and morality in a just, civilized and ordered society."

The same law, as amended by R.A. 9165 or the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act, established that certain drug-related crimes which include the manufacturing and trafficking of dangerous drugs are heinous crimes.

Mr. President, news reports about the increase of illegal drugs and crimes that were triggered by drug use '1are alarming. (SHOW: video clips of drug-related crimes: rape & murder cases + shabu shipments)

Mr. President, illegal drugs are destroying the lives of our people. The organized international drug syndicates are more aggressive than ever. Should we just allow them to keep doing what they are doing? Tapos ano? Hayaan na lang nating patuloy tayong malusutan ng mga sindikato?

The government has put an effort to eradicate the country of shabu by dismantling shabu laboratories across the land. However, shabu manufacturers have come up with ideas to avoid getting caught just like the floating shabu laboratories of the Chinese.

Despite efforts in dismantling the shabu laboratories within the country, South East Asia, including the Philippines, has been the fastest growing shabu market in the world. In the Philippines alone, billions worth of shabu has been confiscated in relation to the anti-drug war of the government. Despite efforts of eradicating our country of this poison, the first quarter of 2019 has the all-time high record of shabu that was seized by authorities.

It is alarming to note that most of the supply of shabu in the Philippines is being facilitated by transnational drug syndicates. Drug-trafficking is well-organized. Aggressive are the international criminal organizations and drug cartels. In fact, there are more foreign nationals than local Filipinos who audaciously smuggle illegal drugs into our borders.

Mr. President, most of these foreign nationals come from countries that impose death penalty for drug offenses: China, Taiwan, South Korea, India, USA, Indonesia, Malaysia, and Singapore. Mr. President, in the ASEAN region, only the Philippines, Cambodia, and the Timor Leste do not have death penalty for drug trafficking. Our strategic location as gateway for transnational transactions and our lenient penal system towards drug-trafficking have made our country a safe place for the syndicates' highly profitable drug business.

Mr. President, DRUG PROBLEM has two faces. First: the USERS who are addicted to DRUGS. Second, the MONEY-MAKERS: the drug lords, manufacturers, pushers and protectors who are addicted to MONEY. Ang mga drug traffickers ay gahaman sa pera at wala silang pakialam kung masira ang kinabukasan ng kanilang mga nabibiktima. Basta ang mahalaga, dumami ang kanilang pera. More drugs, more money.

It is clear that these criminal organizations and their cohorts cannot be deterred by the present war on drugs nor can they be reformed even if they are already inside the detention facilities. Mr. President, it is high time for the State to step up its game and put these criminals to death through judicial sanction. (SHOW: video clip of PDEA's statement of support)

This death penalty, Mr. President, is a self-defense of the State to protect its people against the destruction of lives and properties brought by drug-related crimes that undermine the Filipinos' faith in the government's ability to maintain peace and order in the country and affect our economic development and prosperity. The State, based on the right to protect or as an act of self-defense for society, has the right to take away the life of an individual.

In the case of People of the Philippines versus Carillo, the Supreme Court said, and I quote: "When a person has proved himself to be a dangerous enemy of the society, the latter must protect itself from such enemy by taking his life in retribution for his offense and as an example and warning to others." End of quote.

Mr. President, let me echo the philosophy of the late Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew when he strictly implemented criminal legislation in Singapore, and I quote: "In criminal law legislation, our priority is the security and well-being of law-abiding citizens rather than the rights of the criminal to be protected from incriminating evidence." End of quote.

Mr. President, we can learn a lot from Singapore. Political will to protect the law-abiding citizens and discipline were the formula of Lee Kuan Yew that brought progress to his country.

Mr. President, tahanan natin ang Pilipinas. Responsibilidad natin na panatilihin itong maayos, malinis, at ligtas para sa bawat mamamayan. Sinuman ang may mga masamang hangarin sa ating tahanan ay dapat lamang managot.

Drug syndicates are composed of exceptional criminals who cannot be reformed anymore. They are not scared of governments, they are not scared of punishments. For them, the threat of punishment is less important than the motivation of monetary gain. The primary motivation of these criminals is to make more money at the expense of the society.

DAHIL BA MAGALING SILANG LUMUSOT, HAHAYAAN NA LANG BA NATIN SILANG LASUNIN ANG LIPUNAN AT SIRAIN ANG ATING TAHANAN?

Mr. President, we are not giving up the WAR ON DRUGS because we cannot allow the drug syndicates and the drug lords to reign over our land. This is our land and we have the obligation to protect our people within the bounds of the supreme law of the land, our Constitution.

Mr. President, I am expecting the varied reactions of our colleagues on the arguments I presented. I am anticipating the lengthy discussions and passionate debates regarding the constitutionality of the restoration of death penalty. With this, I urge the Committee on Justice and Human Rights to prioritize the committee hearings on this matter.

Thank you, Mr. President. God bless the Philippines!

News Latest News Feed