In Defense of the Right to Life: Analyzing Factors Affecting Filipino Opinion About Death Penalty B. Public Opinion and the Death Penalty It is widely accepted that public opinion has some influence on public policy, just as public policy shapes public opinion (see, for example, Burstein, 2003; Page and Shapiro, 1992; Wlezien & Soroka, 2010).7 This is expected of democratic societies, in which the public is expected to participate in public policy decisions, either through public consultations and dialogues, elections, or public opinion surveys. Indeed, public opinion has often been used to indicate support for or against public policies. A review by Flanagan and Longmire (1996) cited two purposes of public opinion surveys on crime and justice.8 Citing Hindelang (1974), they noted that surveys document trends in public opinion on issues related to criminal justice across time. For example, surveys track the increase and decline in public support for the death penalty as well the as changes in reasons for support. Increase of support may have happened when there is a high-profile criminal case or declined when a government signaled its intention to abolish it. In addition, public opinion surveys may serve as a “social barometer” to measure public sentiment on criminal justice, thereby providing policymakers direction in criminal justice policy-making. Strong public opposition to crime control policies, such as gun control, may compel policymakers to abandon such policies. On the other hand, public clamor for tighter crime control may force policymakers to act and proceed with legislative actions, such as imposing the death penalty. Stack (2004), however, did not find any robust studies that establishes the nexus of public opinion and policy-making in criminal justice.9 Nevertheless, he noticed that policymakers often misuse the prevailing public opinion to rationalize the need for stricter criminal justice laws, particularly support for the death penalty. Policymaking actors insist that in democratic societies the public’s preferences in support of punishment should be upheld (Durham et al, 2006).10 For instance, proponents of the death penalty have almost always cited public support to justify legislative measures either to retain it (in the case of Japan and the United States) or to reinstate it (as in the case of the Philippines). Sato and Bacon (2015) noted how the Japanese government used public opinion to legitimize retention arguments.11 Sato (2011) found that the surveys conducted by and used by the Japanese government as a justification of popular support for retention were technically flawed and do not accurately depict the public attitudes towards the death penalty.12 However, Justice Thurgood Marshall, in Furman v. Georgia (cited by Bohm, Clark & Aveni, 1991),13 cautioned of the possible impact of an uninformed public with regard to the death penalty. Marshall acknowledged the important role of public opinion on the constitutionality of the death penalty but warned that the public must make a “knowledgeable choice” in their position on the death penalty. The public’s underlying reasons in supporting the death penalty may have been formed because of uninformed sources.14 Paul Burstein, The Impact of Public Opinion on Public Policy: A Review and an Agenda, 56 Political Research Quarterly, (2003). BENJAMIN PAGE & ROBERT SHAPIRO, THE RATIONAL PUBLIC: FIFTY YEARS OF TRENDS IN AMERICANS' POLICY PREFERENCES (1992). CHRISTOPHER WLEZIEN & STUART SOROKA, PUBLIC OPINION AND PUBLIC POLICY (2016). 8 TIMOTHY J. FLANAGAN & DENNIS LONGMIRE, AMERICANS VIEW CRIME AND JUSTICE: A NATIONAL PUBLIC OPINION SURVEY (1996).; Michael Hindelang , Public Opinion Regarding Crime, Criminal Justice, And Related Topics, 11 J. Res. Crime Delinq., 101–116 (1974). 9 Steven Stack, Public Opinion On The Death Penalty: Analysis of Individual-Level Data From 17 Nations, 14(1) Int. Crim. Justice Rev, 69 (2004). 10 Alexis M. Durham, H. Preston Elrod & Patrick T. Kinkade, Public Support for the Death Penalty: Beyond Gallup, 13(4) Justice Q. 705 (1996). 11 SATO & BACON, infra note 15. 12 SATO, infra note 18. 13 Robert M. Bohm, Louise J. Clark, & Adrian F. Aveni, Knowledge and Death Penalty Opinion: A Test of the Marshall Hypothesis, 28(3) J. Res. Crime Delinq. 360 (1991). 14 Id. 7 2