‘PLUNDER can kill, thus, it should be included in the list of crimes punishable by death.”
This was the statement made by United Nationalist Alliance Rep. Gus S. Tambunting of Parañaque City when asked on his opinion regarding the death penalty.
Tambunting said taking at least P50 million intended for the benefit of the Filipino people should be made an offense punishable by death.
“’Pag kinuha mo iyong bahagi ng proyekto na dapat mapunta sa mga proyektong pang-imprastraktura, pangkalusugan, pangkabuhayan or emergency aid ay para mo na ring pinapatay ang mga kawawang kababayan natin dahil sila dapat ang benepisyaryo ng mga ganyang programa. Pinapatay mo ang iyong kapwa-Pilipino,” Tambunting said.
“We are shortchanging the people of the services that they should be getting. As public servants, we have an obligation to the people to serve them, protect their interest and make sure that the government expenditure should go where it was intended to go to in the first place. The money should not end up in someone’s pocket for his or her personal benefit.”
Tambunting added that as lawmakers, and in order to set an example, Congress should be willing to put on the chopping block corrupt public officials guilty of plunder, whether appointed or elected, in all branches and instrumentalities of the government.
He dared fellow congressmen into including plunder in the list punishable by death in the pending death-penalty bill, saying: “If our consciences are clear, then we have nothing to worry about. This would also fit well with the administration’s thrust to battle graft and corruption in the government,” Tambunting said.
Death-penalty bill draws line between rich and poor
THE House majority has clearly drawn the line between rich and poor offenders, with moneyed defendants likely to receive mere prison terms, if at all they get convicted, while destitute ones are bound to draw the death sentence, Deputy Minority Leader Lito Atienza said on Sunday.
“Death for the poor, lavish lives in prison for the rich. This is apparently what our colleagues in the majority want,” Atienza, a crusader against capital punishment, said.
Atienza was responding to the House majority’s last-minute decision to abandon mandatory executions, in favor of giving trial judges the leeway to hand out either the lighter sentence of reclusion perpetua, or the heavier punishment of death, to those found guilty of heinous crimes.
Reclusion perpetua means 30 years in prison, with the convict becoming eligible for possible conditional early release after serving just half of the term, or after 15 to 20 years.
“The death penalty is a travesty. Only indigent citizens inadequately represented at trial will receive it. Wealthy defendants who are able to retain the best criminal defense lawyers will always escape conviction, or get the lesser punishment,” Atienza said.