1. Do you think death penalty can deter crime?

Is death penalty compatible with

the HRBA to human development? Justify your answer.

 The eerie notion of the imposition of death penalty continues to bombard the
intriguing concept of a fair justice system. Various countries, however, have figured
their way by integrating capital punishment as a form of punishment to convicted
criminals. In Asia, China specifically, carries out large numbers of execution per
year, as disclosed by Amnesty International. Also, since October 2008, the Pakistan
People’s Party in Pakistan enforced a moratorium on the death penalty, which
prevented the government from executing criminals in 2009 and 2010. Despite the
moratorium, the Pakistani government continues to sentence hundreds of people to
death and thousands have remained on death row from previous sentences. The
United States, on the other hand, also has been one of the highest to perform
numbers of executions each year. In 2010, the United States executed 46 people.
Currently, 34 of the 50 U.S states still use the death penalty, and Texas, Oklahoma
and Virginia have carried out the most executions in the United States since 1976.
Moreover, crime figures from countries which have banned the death penalty have
not risen. In some cases, they have actually gone down.

However, no matter how promising the idea of revenge is towards hardened

criminals who victimized innocent ones, a strong proof that death penalty can deter
crime is still largely debatable and the idea that it does cannot be factually
supported. Executing someone because they have taken someone’s life is revenge,
not justice.

Far from making society safer, the death penalty has been shown to have a
brutalizing effect on society. State-sanctioned killing only serves to endorse the use
of force and to continue the cycle of violence. There is nothing worse than a
government who backs this blatant disrespect to human rights. Death penalty is not
and will never be compatible with the human rights-based approach to human
development, in fact, it entirely goes against the latter.

Death penalty cannot be expected to be an effective instrument of deterrence when,

as a matter of fact, we can only execute those underprivileged and unfortunate
people caught up in some messy crimes due to poverty and allow big criminal
bosses to get away with it just because they have the influence and wealth to do
such. Our clouded justice system makes death penalty a very questionable
punishment. When the death penalty is carried out, it is final. Mistakes that are
made cannot be unmade. An innocent person may be released from prison for a
crime they did not commit, but an execution can never be reversed.
 The concept of human right continues to be scrutinized as widely accepted views
decide that those who are only covered with the rights are innocent, morally
compassed people. However, we need to remember that human rights are protected
rights for the same reason that it is applicable to anyone who we deem as humans.
In the same manner, though have committed crimes, criminals are hoped and
believed to eventually change and be worthy of a second chance rather than being
eradicated.

2. How does the different dimension of poverty come into play in the context of
the Philippines?

 Poverty is a form of systemic oppression that is not foreign to us as in fact, it is

evident wherever we turn our heads to. As apparent and noticeable as it is, poverty
comes in multi-dimension. Multidimensional poverty looks at deprivation in various
dimensions: income, health, education, access to water, sanitation, secure housing,
etc.

Low household income in the Philippines is very prevalent in the sense that
unemployment and underemployment rate is at a very high percentage. Many
Filipinos are having a hard time securing jobs that would provide for their basic
necessities. A low household income also entails a low economic growth which in
turn, puts the country at difficult conditions. With poverty plaguing the country and
employment opportunities being sparse, many Filipinos are unable to afford
housing which also push them to turn to the streets for accommodation. Street
children flood the streets and families are forced to sleep in the cold concretes with
the possibility of suffering from any sudden rain downpour and extreme heat. The
absence of a comfortable abode also precedes the absence of an access to basic
necessities such as clean water and sanitation. Furthermore, the health of the
Filipinos is at stake since with little money to buy food, Filipinos are forced to
consume little to no food. This unfortunate circumstance lead to the prevalence of
malnutrition and hunger in the country. Since Filipino families find it difficult to
send their children to school, literacy among the youth turns out to be very low
which is saddening. Out of school youths are then exposed to greater risks and
vulnerabilities such as being engaged in criminal activities and offenses.

The different dimensions of poverty come into play in the context of the Philippines
in many aspects other than the ones stated above and as distressing as it is, poverty
continues to torment our country.
 3. What can you do to promote gender equality and equity?

 Despite the advances in our civilized society and the introduction and emergences
of post-modern thinking, gender equality and equity still continue to find struggles
amidst. Thus, priority must be placed on ending gender inequality as the most
pervasive form of inequality and as a senior high school student, I know I can step
up and help in achieving the goal of having a community where all genders are
empowered and no one is left behind just because they identify as such.

In line with the goal to promote gender equality and equity, the following are the
ways I deem best to do to further such goal:

o First, we have to acknowledge that indeed, there are certain differences

among genders and after recognizing such differences, we have to provide
for varying degrees of support and opportunities, depending on one’s need,
for everyone to have an equal footing.

o Moreover, another effective way to promote gender equality and equity is to

reject chauvinistic and misogynistic ideas and not stay silent when listening
to comments that intend to belittle someone’s gender preference. Staying
silent means siding with the systemic oppression. Thus, we have to speak out
at all times.

o Another way to promote gender equality and equity is to encourage other

people and engage in discourses with them to be able to share our
knowledge and in the hopes of changing a biased mind.

o It is also best to join in committees, advocacies, and activities that are

focused in encouraging a safe environment for reporting and fighting against
discrimination, sexual harassment, and etc.

o We also have to listen and reflect because one of the main obstacles to
eliminating prejudice is that people have difficulty recognizing that it really
exists. We have to pay attention and recognize that biased assumptions on a
particular gender are present. When we take the time to listen and reflect, we
are allotted the chance to realize the ways to combat such biases.
Above are few of the ways we can help foster gender equality and if they are practiced by
many, we will soon experience a society free from any gender discrimination and
inequality.
4. What is the difference between reactive and proactive advocacy work?

 Proactive and reactive advocacy work are different types of approaches in solving
societal problems and dilemmas. They are perspective each one provides in
assessing actions and events.

Proactive advocacy work focuses on eliminating problems before they even begin.
An advocacy work can be proactive when there is a recognition of issues or
complaints even before they are being raised or before they surface. This approach
allots more time for a contingency plan or an agenda to effectually solve a problem
that has not happened yet.

On the other hand, reactive advocacy work is an approach where you respond to
events or issues after they have emerged. Somehow, this form of advocacy work is
forced on us since the problem is already there and we only use advocacies to
reduce the problem.

5. What is the difference between producing a position paper and a briefing

note?

 Producing a position paper and a briefing note are two entirely different documents.
A position paper is a document built on arguments. It describes an author’s position
regarding relevant issues founded and supported by credible facts and evidences to
solidify the author’s arguments. A discussion of both sides, which addresses and
refutes arguments that contradict the author’s position, is also presented in this
kind of paper. Despite showing and presenting both sides, a conclusion is necessary
to wrap up and provide for the final stand of the author as well as resolutions to the
issue. This paper includes details and references.

A briefing note, on one hand, summarizes an issue and identifies key pieces of
information like a situation that needs to be addressed. This is a concise document
providing for a background data on an issue. Typically, the briefing note outlines an
issue or situation, analyses the issues involved and offers solutions. The briefing
note must provide just enough background for the reader to understand the
situation and should cover only the main issues to be addressed.

6. What is the difference between debating and dialoguing?

 Debating and dialoguing are processes that involve formal discussion on a particular
topic however, they vary on certain instances.
Debating is combative since participants attempt to prove the other side wrong
while maintaining a clear defense for a participant’s own views. There is an
assumption that both sides stand by their answers and will fight for it. This also
entails listening to the other side’s discussion find flaws and weakness and make
necessary counterarguments to destabilize the other. Participants also seek a
conclusion or vote that ratifies their positions.

A dialogue is different from a debate in the sense that it is collaborative. Participants

lay out various information in the hopes of working together to find a common
ground despite differences. There is an assumption that various individuals have
pieces of the answer and that together, they can craft a solution. Participants listen
to each other not because they want to attack the other side’s arguments, but they
listen to understand and find meaning and agreement. A participant in a dialogue is
open to new positions that may or may not modify his previous ideas. No one ‘wins’
in a dialogue but rather, common good is achieved.