Name: Kristina Marie N.

Rizon
Year/Section: 1L JD-T
Subject: MLAW 116-Philosophy of Law
Schedule: Wednesday (8:00-10:00 PM)
Professor: Atty. Nelia Lagura-Prieto

Philosophy of Law on Punishments

A. The creation of laws and imposition of punishments e.g., death, imprisonment, fine,
destierro, suspension and dismissal from service, cancellation of licenses, reprimand,
community service and the like do not necessarily guarantee result to less crimes.
Equally, deterrence to criminality is not guaranteed. Society hence is not safer not just in
the Philippines but to the USA and other countries as well. The Philippines for example
implemented on previous years death penalty however, it was eventually removed. On
the study of balayph.net and Commission on Human Rights, the 1987 Philippines’
Constitution was the first in Asia to prohibit the use of the death penalty, stating that: ‘the
death penalty shall not be imposed unless for compelling reasons involving heinous
crimes, the Congress hereafter provides for it. Although it is only conditionally removed
in our laws, there is no credible evidence or recognized research that demonstrates that
death penalty deters crime, including drug offenses, any more than lengthy
imprisonment does.
Moreover, the congested jails in the Philippines and the continuous imprisonment
of some individuals guilty and convicted of various crimes only prove that creation of
laws and imposition of penalties thereof do not necessarily deter criminality and does not
guarantee safe society as there are still present crimes committed every day. Even the
rich countries like the USA and their laws on drugs and the regulation of their position of
guns wherein they allow it provided with proper processes only lead to more violence
and commitment of crimes regardless of the laws punishing on its violations.

B. If imprisonments have not deterred criminality, what could be the reason/s why? Should
imprisonment/ death be thrown out altogether? If not, how then can we increase the
probability of punishments to effectively elevate morality and thus promote peace and
security in the society.
“No judiciary, anywhere in the world, is so robust that it can guarantee that
innocent life will not be taken, and there is an alarming body of evidence to indicate that
even well-functioning legal systems have sentenced to death men and women who were
subsequently proven innocent.” --ZeidRa’ad Al Hussein, United Nations High
Commissioner for Human Rights
Imprisonment do not necessarily deter criminality perhaps because imprisonment
do not necessarily equate to justice and that justice system is not perfect, it can be
flawed especially in the developing countries like the Philippines where justice can be
more afforded by the moneyed than the poor. Perhaps no criminality deterrence is
guaranteed because the justice system prosecutes the innocent ones, then no change
as to presence of crimes. Death penalty should not be imposed however, imprisonment
should not be totally removed as punishment should be dependent on the severity of
crimes committed. To effectively elevate morality and thus promote peace and security in
 the society, punishments must be reformative than retributive. The forward-looking
stance on punishment should be the principle on the imposition of punishments as I
believe that humans are flawed and it can be remedied regardless of the evils we
commit and every individual has the right to life even the prisoners do.

C. What other solutions are practiced elsewhere which have shown good results of
deterring crimes? What can be learned from the safest countries of the world?
In order to curb crime, the focus should be on reforming the justice system,
rendering it more effective, while also ensuring that it is humane. The State should invest
in measures that are well planned and more effective policies such as fair, functioning
and ethical and functioning criminal justice system in addressing issues of public security
and crime. We can empower the individuals guilty of crimes committed by giving them
livelihood and instill values through various intervention programs that would help them
redeem and be good citizens of the country.
According to the officeofjusticeprogram.org, Denmark is ranked as first for the
safest country in the world, with Norway second and Finland as third. The common
among the three is the impressive judicial independence and rule of law wherein courts
of justices are strengthened and prioritized to treat crimes better. The Danish
correctional system accordingly takes a realistic approach to handling offenders.
Accordingly, it is aware of what prisons can and cannot accomplish. Social problems, not
necessarily criminal, are viewed as being better handled by socioeconomic measures
unconnected to the criminal justice system. It is viewed that the criminal justice system in
their county is humane in its treatment of offenders and that certain weaknesses exist in
the application of such as the use of mental intuitions for those considered habitual
status offenders. Humane and lenient imprisonment is pursed essentially as moral rather
than a practical policy since it cannot be shown to reduce recidivism or the crime rate.

D. The backward-looking justification is regarded as barbaric. (An eye for an eye).

Punishments are supposed to be justified by some abstract moral principle. How then
can this goal be reached if in order to punish the depraved, we have become depraved
ourselves.
Backward looking justification say the apparent example of death penalty is
barbaric. It violates the right to equality and non-discrimination. Back ward looking
justifications are retributive unlike the forward looking which is reformative. The former
prohibit correction of mistakes by the justice system and leaves no room for human error
with the graves consequences.
Democratic and just societies are required to provide due process to people
before the law. We can therefore achieve this by humane treatments towards individuals
legally convicted of crimes and implement socio-economic programs and spiritual
intervention programs that would aid themselves. For me, it doesn’t deprive ourselves
but rather the act of helping and treating our co-humans, as humans, is an empowering
and fulfilling courage that would make me better citizen in this lifetime rather than
resorting to equally criminal acts towards the errors committed by our co human beings.