Criminal Justice System Pros And Cons Essay
Debate
Negative Side
Resolve that the power of the President to pardon convicted criminals be abolished
I. Argument:
The power of the President to give pardon to criminals should not be abolished because of the fact that the President did not abuse her powers and abided by what’s written in legal documents.
II. Analysis:
What is pardon in the government standards? Pardon is the act of grace or forgiveness, proceeding from the power entrusted with the execution of the law, which exempts the individual, on whom it is bestowed upon, from the punishment the law inflicts from the crime he has committed. The pardon in this case is given exclusively by the president. There is what we call a full pardon, on where …show more content…
Even if the pardoning power is only given by the president, there are still limitations set to the power, in that case the power is not easily abused. A lot of comments about how the victims and their families don’t get justice for giving pardons to those criminals but that is not necessarily true at all. Those victims and families who don’t get any justice are those who haven’t found the suspects of the crime. These pardoned criminals have already served part of the sentence by doing that they’ve already given justice to those victims and during their sentence, they’ve remained in good behaviour, thus making them qualified and showing the people that they are now reformed men. By pardoning them they also get the justice for being able to start anew. There are also certain exceptions written in the 200 revised rules and regulations of the board of pardons and paroles (BPP) go as follows: those convicted for evasion of service; those who violated the conditions of their conditional pardon; habitual delinquents or recidivists; those convicted for kidnapping for ransom; those convicted for violation of RA 9165 or the “The Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002,” and
Negative Side
Resolve that the power of the President to pardon convicted criminals be abolished
I. Argument:
The power of the President to give pardon to criminals should not be abolished because of the fact that the President did not abuse her powers and abided by what’s written in legal documents.
II. Analysis:
What is pardon in the government standards? Pardon is the act of grace or forgiveness, proceeding from the power entrusted with the execution of the law, which exempts the individual, on whom it is bestowed upon, from the punishment the law inflicts from the crime he has committed. The pardon in this case is given exclusively by the president. There is what we call a full pardon, on where …show more content…
Even if the pardoning power is only given by the president, there are still limitations set to the power, in that case the power is not easily abused. A lot of comments about how the victims and their families don’t get justice for giving pardons to those criminals but that is not necessarily true at all. Those victims and families who don’t get any justice are those who haven’t found the suspects of the crime. These pardoned criminals have already served part of the sentence by doing that they’ve already given justice to those victims and during their sentence, they’ve remained in good behaviour, thus making them qualified and showing the people that they are now reformed men. By pardoning them they also get the justice for being able to start anew. There are also certain exceptions written in the 200 revised rules and regulations of the board of pardons and paroles (BPP) go as follows: those convicted for evasion of service; those who violated the conditions of their conditional pardon; habitual delinquents or recidivists; those convicted for kidnapping for ransom; those convicted for violation of RA 9165 or the “The Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002,” and