For my SLR topic, I told my SLR supervisor Prof. Lumba that I would like to write about Sen. Miriam Santiago's proposal in 2007 about creating laws akin to the Sex Offender Registration laws in the US and other countries. I wanted to explore the mechanics of the proposal drafted by the Sen. Santiago, apply it to the Philippine setting and explore on whether its constitutionality would be upheld in our jurisdiction.
The constitutionality of Sex Offender Registration laws has been challenged in certain landmark cases in the US such as Smith v. Doe, (538 U.S. 84) and Connecticut Dept. of Public Safety v. Doe (538 U.S. 1). In both cases, the petitioners were previously convicted of sex offenses and although have served their sentences, were required to register in compliance with their respective State laws, their names, residences and fact of prior conviction in a community website, accessible to the public. In Smith, the petitioner questioned the registration laws saying it was an unconstitutional ex post facto law for meting out undue punishment. The Court held that the registration laws were merely a form of civil registration, not meant to shame the ex-convict, although it might have that very effect. In Connecticut, the petitioner called the laws violative of the right to due process since they were deprived of the opportunity to be heard to prove that they were no longer harmful to the society. The Court once again upheld the constitutionality of the laws saying the fact of previous conviction was the sole factor determinative of whether one is covered by the law or not, without regard to any external factor such as the current state of mind of the convict.
Sir Lumba told me he will approve my topic if I present a new angle not previously discussed by the US cases. So far, I have come up with only one: Equal protection among all convicts. I'm still developing the theory on that one.
My main concern perhaps is, whether or not it will pass into law and its constitutionality upheld by the Supreme Court: do we need it? In rural areas where most cases of incest, rape or sexual perversity takes place, who would bother checking on a website to see if sexual predators are living among them? How is enforcement? When the local police could hardly keep track of the criminals running amuck, how are they supposed to check on whether previous convicts or those on bail are actually registering in a website? The law even requires these convicts to register everytime they change their residences. Who will monitor these facts? Who will care to look at them?
Most importantly, in a country where we value and protect reputation, how can a Filipino (no distinction between males and females) handle the thought of being labeled a "sex offender"? In the US cases, the Courts held that "shaming mechanisms" are not punitive in nature and therefore do not consitute undue punishment. Does the same hold true in our jurisdiction---no, society?
The constitutionality of Sex Offender Registration laws has been challenged in certain landmark cases in the US such as Smith v. Doe, (538 U.S. 84) and Connecticut Dept. of Public Safety v. Doe (538 U.S. 1). In both cases, the petitioners were previously convicted of sex offenses and although have served their sentences, were required to register in compliance with their respective State laws, their names, residences and fact of prior conviction in a community website, accessible to the public. In Smith, the petitioner questioned the registration laws saying it was an unconstitutional ex post facto law for meting out undue punishment. The Court held that the registration laws were merely a form of civil registration, not meant to shame the ex-convict, although it might have that very effect. In Connecticut, the petitioner called the laws violative of the right to due process since they were deprived of the opportunity to be heard to prove that they were no longer harmful to the society. The Court once again upheld the constitutionality of the laws saying the fact of previous conviction was the sole factor determinative of whether one is covered by the law or not, without regard to any external factor such as the current state of mind of the convict.
Sir Lumba told me he will approve my topic if I present a new angle not previously discussed by the US cases. So far, I have come up with only one: Equal protection among all convicts. I'm still developing the theory on that one.
My main concern perhaps is, whether or not it will pass into law and its constitutionality upheld by the Supreme Court: do we need it? In rural areas where most cases of incest, rape or sexual perversity takes place, who would bother checking on a website to see if sexual predators are living among them? How is enforcement? When the local police could hardly keep track of the criminals running amuck, how are they supposed to check on whether previous convicts or those on bail are actually registering in a website? The law even requires these convicts to register everytime they change their residences. Who will monitor these facts? Who will care to look at them?
Most importantly, in a country where we value and protect reputation, how can a Filipino (no distinction between males and females) handle the thought of being labeled a "sex offender"? In the US cases, the Courts held that "shaming mechanisms" are not punitive in nature and therefore do not consitute undue punishment. Does the same hold true in our jurisdiction---no, society?
No comments:
Post a Comment