More importantly, through the recent accession by the Philippines of the Second Optional Protocol to the ICCPR, the country has notonly affirmed but has bounditself to abolish, in perpetuity, the death penalty and uphold therighttolife. Thesaid Second Optional ProtocolStatesthat, “1, No one within the jurisdiction ofa State Party to the present Protocol shall be executed. 2. Each State Party shall take all necessary measuresto abolish the death penalty within itsjurisdiction.” Under the international law principle of pacta sunt servanda, States are required to observetreaties it has entered into in good faith. And in the case of Tafiada vs. Angara,? the Supreme Court ruled that “treaties do indeed limit or restrict the sovereignty of a State. By their voluntary acts, States may surrender some aspects of their power in exchangefor greater benefits granted by or derived from a convention or pact. Underthe rule of pacta sunt servanda, a State is bound to make such modifications in its laws as may be necessary to ensure thefulfillment of the obligations undertaken underthetreaty.” The enactment by the Philippines of Republic Act No. 9346 prohibiting imposition of the death penalty in the country showed our progressive compliance with our international obligations on humanrights. As such, States cannot go back norrenegeonits self-imposed and voluntary obligations. Hence, the commission strongly maintainsthat the re-imposition of the death penalty is a breach of international obligations by virtue of our bounden commitments with international human rights treaties and our adherence to the principle ofpacta sunt servanda underinternationallaw. The Commissionalso affirms that, under the 1987 Philippine Constitution,it is declared Principle of the State to “value the dignity of every human person and guaranteefull respectfor human rights.” Recommendations Indeed, the instant bill limits the application of the death penalty only to multiple murder and specific violations of RA 9165. However, the Commission reiterates its vehement opposition to the re-imposition of the death penalty in any andall crimes under Philippines laws. First, we emphasize our affirmation of the humanrightto life and second, we uphold our international humanrights obligation underthe SecondProtocol to the ICCPR ontheabolition of the death penalty. The Commission alsoreiterates that certainty of punishment, and notseverity thereof, serves more the purposeof addressing the atrocious commission of heinous crimes in the country. Hence, the need to review and strengthen further the five pillars of justice to ensure that justice is indeed served and served promptly. Proper implementation of the law cannot be overemphasized. The Commission also wishes to take this opportunity to open the floor for consultation with relevant stakeholders and draw somealternative measures such as restoratives justice, instead of death penalty, which is geared towards restitution of § General CommentNo. 6, paragraph 6, ICCPR °272 SCRA 18 $1