This study advances a legal position that challenges the content of the various Bills seeking to re-impose the death penalty. It does so based on the Philippines’ obligations under domestic and international laws. It provides empirical approaches and data which respond to the argument that the Philippines stands to breach international law as a result of Article III, Section 19 of the Philippine Constitution. The authors also argue that the introduction of capital punishment will considerably impact the standing of the Philippines in the international community, its work within the United Nations (UN), and its economic relations with trade partners. In truth, the Philippine Constitution and international laws binding upon the Philippines work together in upholding the right to life. This study advances a credible justice system that is objective, impartial and incorruptible. Background to the death penalty in the Philippines The Philippines first abolished the death penalty under the 1987 Constitution. It was the first Asian country to abolish the death penalty for all crimes.4 Following this abolition, all death sentences were reduced to reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment. During the early part of former President Fidel Ramos’ administration, the death penalty was re-imposed by virtue of R.A. No. 7659, which was passed in December 1993. A convict, Leo Echagaray, was executed in February 1999, followed by six other executions for various allegedly heinous crimes. However, notwithstanding the reimposition of the death penalty, national crime rate increased by 15.3 percent or a total of 82,538 (from 71,527 recorded crimes in the previous year).5 Subsequently, President Joseph Estrada declared a de facto moratorium on executions. President Gloria Arroyo lifted the de facto moratorium on 05 December 2003 “to sow fear into the hearts of criminals.”6 Although executions were set to resume on January 2004, the administration in fact issued reprieves on any scheduled executions.7 At the same time, the Supreme Court decided to reopen the Lara-Licayan case.8 The Court admitted newly-discovered evidence, which exonerated both Lara and Licayan from culpability.9 from international treaties. If you can walk away from an international treaty, it’s much more easy to walk away from a commercial treaty.” 4 Philippine Centrer for Investigative Journalism, A timeline of death penalty in the Philippines, PCIJ Blog, Apr. 18, 2006, available at http://pcij.org/blog/2006/04/18/a-timeline-of-death-penalty-in-the-philippines (last accessed Mar. 03, 2017). 5 Id. 6 Id. 7 Id. 8 See People of the Philippines v. Licayan, G.R. Nos. 140900 and 140911, Feb. 17, 2004. 9 Id. Page 3 of 23