The Volatilian™ invites all its followers to have their say. We believe that to get the best grasp on the social issues that affect us all, the net should be cast as wide as possible. You’ll get less fish from a rock pool than you will from a lake, or better still, the open sea. That’s why we’re launching a new section – “Your Forum” – which belongs to you; it’s the place you can go to have your say.

You won’t be censored; you won’t be blocked – we’ve never done that and we never will. Just as everyone in a democracy has the right to his/her own vote, everyone in a free society is also entitled to have his/her views heard. Obvious trolls, however, will be restricted; they have no place in a free and open debate. Apart from that, there’ll be no gagging, no blue pencil, no selection process. No chains around your thoughts.

Here’s the format for Your Forum. Each week we’ll pose a question which will be based on a current topic – it could be anything: political, social, economic, cultural. You’re then free to express how you feel about that issue. We’ll participate ourselves, but that’s just us engaging in your forum like anyone else. Read down and you’ll find the first topic.

But here’s why we want to do this. In the days when we had newspapers we could trust – if anyone can remember that far back – part of what they encouraged was something known as “readership participation”. The once-familiar ‘Letters to the Editor’ columns were specifically for that purpose. It was a way of letting readers express their views which, in turn, would elicit the views of other readers. It allowed anyone to participate in the analysis of the news. It widened the debate.

Readers could express their concerns and frustrations on the issues of the day. For many it was the only way they could do that. This encouraged a healthy dialogue from right across society – not just from select groups or individuals – and, as such, added to the energy of the news coverage. It also broadened understanding of those issues. That’s what we hope will happen here.

However as mainstream media became more politicised – lacing to the Left like lemmings – they became more propagandist and less journalistic. Increasingly, newspapers and broadcasters practiced the dark art of self-censorship. They only wanted to hear from readers and viewers who supported their editorial stance. Thus, views that didn’t conform to their political direction were not published. They were put on the spike. Those that did were given plenty of space. So, effectively, “readership participation” became “readership manipulation”.

Now we come to the present day and the new medium for news distribution; the Internet. This is the home of social media which has blossomed – largely – because of the deaf ear of the mainstream media which have long treated their audiences like mindless cattle. This has become the prime space for independent news sites, bloggers and social-networking platforms which allow people – ordinary people – to express their views.

But the Internet’s also become the space for mainstream media – particularly the Western variety – which was forced to beat a retreat from the world of print for a series of reasons, including: falling advertising revenues; unsustainable print costs and desperately plunging circulation numbers. To greater and lesser degrees these were all failing media; for them the Internet was a lifeline for survival. They could drastically cut their overheads and live to fight another day.

But the fact is, many of these publications had already burned their readerships long before they took themselves online. What’s remarkable though is that they haven’t learned from the errors of their past. The very things that saw their popularity go down the toilet in the bricks-and-mortar world they’ve brought with them to the ether world. Here, though, the mainstream is unable to manipulate thought quite the same – though, as we know, that’s not through want of trying.

They continue to self-censor; they continue to be organs of progressive propaganda, having little or no regard for journalistic integrity, and they continue to treat their audiences like mindless cattle.

We believe strongly in freedom of expression as we do in freedom of the press. Unfortunately, by a bitter irony, it’s the press – specifically, the Liberal (meaning bigoted and intolerant) mainstream media – that’s made it its business to expunge that freedom.

What’s certain to us is that our followers won’t find a forum in any of those places where their views will be respected – unless, of course, they happen to reflect the same views of those mass media.

That sort of ‘editorial masturbation’ – for want of a better phrase – however, contributes zero to any discussion. It’s just more social engineering by the progressive Left; a sinister form of eugenics that seeks to brainwash societies across the map and create a their-size-fits-all one-world order. But more of that some other time.

Meanwhile, back to Your Forum. To launch this we have a double-barreled question for you:

Should the Philippines re-introduce the death penalty for serious drug crimes, and should it be extended to other heinous crimes such as child-killing and the butchering of kidnap victims by terrorist gangs? 

death penalty Philippines

Some brief background. Capital punishment which is provided for under the Revised Penal Code was “abolished” by President Corazon Aquino, re-instated by her successor, Fidel V. Ramos, placed under a de facto moratorium by his successor, Joseph Estrada, scrapped by the next president, Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, left scrapped by her successor, Benigno “Noynoy” Aquino, and its reinstatement is now being pushed for by President Rodrigo Duterte.

In March, the Philippine House of Representatives overwhelmingly approved a Bill that would restore the death penalty – 216 members voted for it; 54 against – though this proposed legislation had been very much watered down from an original proposal that gave a list of 21 crimes where capital punishment could be prescribed. The Bill that passed and is now awaiting reading time in the Senate, limited the use of the death penalty to serious drug-related offences.

Those in favour of the earlier proposal – Duterte included – had wanted to include, among others, the following non-drug crimes: qualified piracy, qualified bribery, parricide (the killing of a parent or close relative), murder, infanticide, rape, kidnapping and serious illegal detention, robbery with violence, destructive arson, plunder, treason.

Right now, the penalty for heinous crimes in the Philippines is “reclusion perpetua”, meaning permanent imprisonment – though in practice it doesn’t mean that at all; it means jail terms ranging from 20 years plus 1 day to 40 years.

Serious and heinous crime is an abiding problem in the Philippines. It affects not just the immediate victims but also their relatives and friends, their workmates, their schools, their churches and their communities.

The re-instatement – or not – of the death penalty, this is a major issue for the Filipino people. It is only right therefore that their views should be heard. This is Your Forum. Go for it.

52 Comments

  • only for Heinous Crimes like Rape and or with murder, Engage in illegal drugs on a certain amount/weight, PLUNDER by People in Government and Private Persons Dealing with Government, Rebellion and Treason, kidnapping with ransom/death of victim, riding in tandem with death or disability of victim, holdup with death of victim or disability, drug lords and narco politicians. they don’t have a right to Human Rights!

  • I fully agree with the reimposition of death penalty for heinous crimes. Despite being a predominantly Christian population, the criminal minds,mind you…getting younger too, are never afraid of so called God or divine retribution,even karma. They seem to be callous,crazies, soulless,of inhuman characters,especially drug addicts & inherently murderous & corrupt, deserves hellish punishment just to serve harsh lesson for other criminally minded. Then we can save a sane and just society for our future generations.

  • DEATH PENALTY: THE DISTURBING OPTION?

    If I were to opt for DEATH PENALTY, I would advance the following argument:

    HUMAN LIFE is the highest value there is.

    It stands NATURALLY to reason therefore that whatever poses as a most IMMINENT and CLEAREST THREAT or DANGER to HUMAN LIFE must be, by any means,  neutralized, if not totally eliminated.

    Let me cite here two (2) concrete examples  in order to provide context in understanding my personal  stand relative to the reimposition of death penalty.

    1. In the rape of the 4-month old infant in Carcar, Cebu by a drug-crazed 40-year old family man, if I was the father of that baby and I happened to witness the act, I would have killed then and there the rapist without any second thought at all.  And even after my NATURAL RAGE shall have subsided, I would not be compelled to feel remorseful; in fact I would rather feel that my act was justifiable, albeit not necessarily moral.   Anybody who would say I violated the human right of the rapist is himself or herself the one not human; perhaps he or she is from another galaxy.

    2. In that instance where that savage of a girl named Margallo willfully tortured children in connivance with a certain John Scully who was notorious for being a recidivist pedophile,  my most natural reaction even if I did not not know nor was in any way related to the victimized children would be to wish that a most savage death would befall upon her (not respect for her human right). And anyone who would say let us UNDETSTAND her because she must have also undergone the same ordeal and we must respect her human right, is an ultimate hypocrite, in fact, a consummate liar.

    These two real instances prove beyond any doubt that the imperfect human environment within the inherently imperfect world would indeed bound to produce “naturally” its own set of criminals. And some of these criminals, given the inherent defects of the society where they reside would tend naturally to become INCORREGIBLE, IRREDEEMABLE, RECIDIVIST VIOLATORS against the most paramount value there is – LIFE.

    SO, it requires no genius to figure out reasonably that these freaking creatures have become  clearest threat to the LIFE of the rest of those who live normal human life in the community.

    What then to make of these deadly and dangerous ‘zombies’?

    I think that God, whom believers consider as the absolute sole authority to give and take away life, will not literally come down from heaven and mete out personally to the criminals the judgment they deserve. God, who is pure spirit, cannot again reincarnate, that is reassume human form, and be the one to switch on the electric chair, or administer lethal injection or issue the command to shoot the guilty by firing squad.

    This brings us now to the concept of STEWARDSHIP.

    In the creation narrative, God did not create man on the first day; rather, He created man on the 6th day after when the entire created universe had been already completed.

    God, being perfect and thus self sufficient, did not need in any way anything of the material world; He would not become less of a God even if He did not create the material world ‘ex nihilo’.

    It is not then difficult to deduce  that the whole of creation was made to exist not for God himself but for man.

    Precisely, God delegated to man the SUPREME TASK and RESPONSIBILITY to “SUBDUE and DOMINATE the WORLD.”

    In other words, this stewardship that God assigned to man implies that man, by his capacity to know and make free choices,  should see to it that the entire material world should be MANAGED (that is, nurtured, taken care of, safeguarded, maintained, sustained) in a manner that should SERVE the LIFE of the WORLD in general and HUMAN LIFE in particular so that the WORLD would truly reflect HEAVEN on EARTH and MAN’s LIFE as the most concrete symbol of GOD’s continuing UNFOLDING and PRESENCE in the world.

    The essence of this truth is succinctly captured in how man is described in the Holy Scriptures as “THE CROWNING GLORY of GOD’s CREATION.”

    It behooves  on man therefore that through  proper, diligent and conscientious use of his INTELLIGENCE, he will always REALIZE that now HE IS THE ONE DIRECTLY in CHARGE of  STEWARDING the LIFE of the ENTIRE CREATION.

    Hence, if this LIFE, specifically that of MAN’s, will be compromised or undermined and will be preponderantly threatened and endangered to the point of being most likely destroyed, then by all means PURGE or ELIMINATE that which constitutes the source or cause of this threat or danger.

    And YES, even INCLUDING the IMPOSITION of DEATH PENALTY.

  • I agree with what the President cited about the law.The retribution aspect of it.That is why you have to pay for your crime.So death penalty does not only serve as a deterent to crime,but an equalizer.The chance also for the victims and their lovedones to get even with the offenders.It would certainly satiate the retribution aspect of the law.

  • DEATH SENTENCE by HANGING in national public view with simultaneous television broadcast for those crime I personally considered heinous such as;

    1. Graft and Corruption
    2. Rape with Homicide
    3. Illegal Drugs Trade & Proliferation
    4. Rebellious & Treasonous Act
    5. PLUNDER of ALL Government Employees
    6. Terrorism
    7. Kidnappings

  • Lagpas isang taon ng halos araw araw may pnpatay n mga drugs suspects dhil s war on drugs ng du30 administration, nbawasan n b ang krimen,nbwasan n b ang mga drug pushers,ntakot b cila? Hndi db? So d n rin cguro klngan yn dewth penalty,la rin kc yn mgiging epekto s kaisipan ng mga kriminal..yung ugat ng problema ang dpt sugpuin nila,una khirapan,pngalawa cguruhin nila n d n bumabalik s klye pra ibenta ulit ung mga shabu n nkukumpiska nila.

  • yes, for reimposition of death penalty. life for a life. at any rate it should come with an improved justice system to avoid persecution of an innocent. a reclusion perpetua has an adverse effects to family of the victims who suffers for the loss of their loveones and yet, as taxpayer, they contribute for the subsistence of the perpetrators while in jail. on the other hand, jailing a convict is not an assurance that he will stop committing heinous crimes especially if he has influence and money to continue his illegal activities outside of the bilibid prison.

  • yes, and LIFE SENTENCE should be revised to until the age of 75 or 80yrs old not the calendar year. include PLUNDER by WORKERS in GOVERNMENT including PRIVATE PERSON/S dealing with GOVERNMENT… LIFE SENTENCE less than a MILLION , DEATH SENTENCE above A MILLION, guess this might stop CORRUPTION bcoz it includes Private Persons .

  • Noon pinapatay ang mga hostege pinopogotan ng ulo may nagagawa ba sila ilang billon ang nakokoha nila sa mga enosente na pinapatay noon lahit si duterte na hinahamon pa nila may pinogotan pa sila ng ulo palagay nyo matutowa ang mga tao lalp na ang nasa mga kapayarehan insolto sa kanila yon kaya wag mag sabing hinde nyo alam na mararaming namamatay na mga negpsyate inosente sila bakit pabayaan paba ang mga ganon na mga pang yayari pag mag sabe ka ng tutoo mali paba yan noon ilang besis ako nasagasaan kahit isa walang nakakita na nang uayari sa akin walang pakialam ang tao sa paligid pati wallit konokoha pa sa halip tutolongan itinatapon pa sa damohan noon yon ngayon kahit sagi lang alam na ng taong bayan yan ang pag babago hine kagaya noon. Ang ngayon kita naman natin na pinogotan noon ang tao may kapalit na pira may nagagawa ba sila patawatawa lang paano duwag ang nasa pwesto ngayon ginagawa na ang tama kayo pa nasa pwesto hahadlang mag isip naman kahit konti upang hinde kayo pag pistahan ng taong bayan ang mali noon itenotuwid lang ni duterte ang hinde nyo alam na masakit yan sa puso mg pres. Duterte kasi ang taong namamatay nasa loob ng panonongkulan niya piro pikit mata niya tinotupad alang alang sa karamihan sa bayan ang sosoko na rehab naman ang lalaban yan ang napapahamak dahil walang magagawa ang mga pulis maliban sa gagawin nila ang tungkolin nila sa bayan pulis tutupad lang sa tungkolin sa kapayapaan hinde ito alam ng masasama dahil ang sareli nila ang tenotipad nila kahit alam nilang mali sila

  • I think we have embraced so much the foreign tendency of a liberal commitment.It has found its way on the very laws of our land.Imagine,parents and teachers can no longer discipline children with a simple spank.That was not the way we were brought up,as i remember what our elders used to say,”spare the rod and spoil the child”.Discipline is instilled at a very young age,not liberality.Afterwhich,we have even worsen our fate by taking away criminal liability from teens that are already at the age of reason.It is like enducing our youth to become criminals.And such what exactly happened,as we already have very young criminals.The foreign mentality have already intruded our Filipino minds,thru political inclinement.Divorce,decriminalization of drug use,same sex marriage were being considered,which are truly not Filipino.These are incongruous to our values,principles,as well as tradition.Majority of the Filipinos are favorable of death penalty.It is those that are brainwashed,the willing victims of foreign or liberal indoctrination,that are against it.

  • Revamp the judiciary first because well-crafted laws will be useless unless our courts do their duties FAST. We have judges and justices who procrastinate a lot, who just sit around daydreaming, who attend to their vices 24/7, who think their salas are a market place and those who do not care about justice and the law at all….

  • Yes aq dyan…drugs is d root of all evil…unahin n yun mga nkapwestong nagpapatakbo ng droga s bansa upang wla ng masandalan ang mga maliliit n pusher at user…pursue death penalty thru this column and God Bless the Philippines and President Rodrigo Roa Duterte…Mabuhay po kayo…

  • There were more than 1,700 engagements on this Your Forum topic from right across the Philippines – and not a single one that was against bringing back the death penalty. That’s an overwhelming “Yes” to reinstate capital punishment. It closely mirrors last March’s ballot in the House of Representatives in which 79.7% of members voted for its return.

    But let’s put our result into even sharper focus. The typical size of opinion polls in the United States is between 500 and 1,000 respondents. In the case of Gallup it’s 1,000, whether for a traditional ‘stand-alone poll’ – as the Your Forum one was – or for one night’s interviewing from Gallup Daily Tracking.

    In the Philippines, sample sizes tend to be larger: the March 2017 Social Weather Survey, for example, used face-to-face interviews from 1,200 adults. Pulse Asia’s “Ulat ng Bayan” Survey – a nationwide poll conducted in June – was also based on a sample pool of 1,200 adults.

    If the Philippine Senate needs any guidance on how the country feels about this issue, it could do worse that consider the views of Your Forum.

  • We common tao are not affected with death penalty even martial law,,if you live an upright lives there is nothing to fear with martial law or even death penalty,,,,,i think we need to restore death penalty …to cleanse our society,,,,people should abide by laws,,,,

  • For me Death Penalty is good for our country , like singapore , thailand , malaysia and more… Specially in drug relation problem and some heinous crime, like rape , kidnapping , coruption and terrorism.

  • First I congratulate the Volatilian for this, second Mr. Polestico for his article it reinforced my YES to Death Penalty!
    Question, does the law on “human rights” specifically stand ONLY for the criminal? Or is this public attitude? A criminal has NO human rights–if proven guilty of a heinous crime against humanity or treason against country should pay for it with death–and within days or a week at most–to avoid political and church manipulation, period! As for the Ozamis Mayor–he was responsible for his ‘little army’ that obstructed justice, he got caught in his own ‘war’ and dragged his family in it! Any hearing on his human rights is null and void–In my opinion most criminal laws were established by criminals for their protection way since the 17 hundreds–that is why constitutions are being constantly altered with addendum.

  • Well one has to remember that many innocent people were executed and later on they found out that they were not guilty. No chance to repare the human damage made. There are umpteen examples from the USA. I am therefore strictly against death penalty. What does the bible say? Thou shall not kill. Well I am an atheist but here the bible is right. Think at it when you go to church next time when you support the death penalty.

  • Democracy define as 3 co equal branches. Pero sa laging buntot lang si justice. Masakit praktisan ng mga bullying na executive at rubber stamp na congress. Kaya sikat ang swift justice ng estado at minsan ang kangaroo court ng mga rebelde dahil ang justice system ay bangkarote sa budget kaya kinakalawang at iniaanay ang system flow ng justice. Guarantee first the so called EQUAL co independence. Kung lapastanganin nga ngayon ang CA, Ombudsman at Korte Suprema ng riding in tandem na legislative at executive. Yung topic o forum mo (Volatilian)makitid, iniiwas mo sa ang gubat kapalit ng isang puno.

  • I definitely agree for the re-imposition of death penalty on serious drug-related offences and heinous crimes to include, among others, the following non-drug crimes: qualified piracy, qualified bribery, parricide (the killing of a parent or close relative), murder, infanticide, rape, kidnapping and serious illegal detention, robbery with violence, destructive arson, plunder, treason.

Leave a Reply