V. “Heinous Crimes": The 1987 Philippine Constitution Because, for the reasons given above, drafted, any attempt to reintroduce the death Philippines should no penalty for death penalty in the Philippines is illegal. the the domestic law longer of the provide in any Strictly speaking, it is not necessary to circumstances. The proviso to Section consider the effect of Section 19 of the 19 was limited in two ways. Bill of Rights of the 1987 Philippine Constitution. But the same provision in First, fact Congress provides additional compelling it required an assessment that there by existed grounds for the invalidity and illegality compelling of the proposed laws. death penalty. Secondly, it imposed reasons to reinstate the a permanent limitation for the purposes Section 19 provides: of the domestic law of the Philippines — the death penalty could thereafter be Excessive nor fines cruel, not degrading punishment death shall inflicted. be imposed, re-imposed or inhuman Finally, Neither penalty be imposed, compelling reasons crimes, the provides for unless, involving Congress it. already imposed Any death shall be shall for there compelling reasons reinstatement of hereafter constitution penalty done that to it can penalty.” 19 recognition represents that at the a considered time it was 42 was everything inhuman reclusion perpetua. Section can the be never any to justify death penalty, “the compelling reason required by the heinous reduced only for “heinous crimes.” be that the State has in its command so justified an punishment to called use death