Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 188 views

    Piandiong Vs The Philippines (Case Summary)

    Uploaded by

    Ma. Fabiana Garcia
    Three individuals, Piandiong, Morallos, and Bulan, were convicted of robbery with homicide in the Philippines and sentenced to death. Their appeals and motions for reconsideration were denied, and they were executed by lethal injection. The counsel for the victims then sought help from the UN Human Rights Committee, alleging that the death penalty was unconstitutional except for the most heinous crimes. However, the Committee found no violation of the ICCPR and reiterated that the Philippines breached its obligations by executing the individuals before the Committee had finished reviewing the case.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Piandiong Vs The Philippines (Case Summary)

    Uploaded by

    Ma. Fabiana Garcia
    188 views1 page
    Three individuals, Piandiong, Morallos, and Bulan, were convicted of robbery with homicide in the Philippines and sentenced to death. Their appeals and motions for reconsideration were denied, and they were executed by lethal injection. The counsel for the victims then sought help from the UN Human Rights Committee, alleging that the death penalty was unconstitutional except for the most heinous crimes. However, the Committee found no violation of the ICCPR and reiterated that the Philippines breached its obligations by executing the individuals before the Committee had finished reviewing the case.

    Original Description:

    Communication No. 869/1999 December 20, 2000

    Original Title

    Piandiong vs The Philippines (Case Summary)

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Three individuals, Piandiong, Morallos, and Bulan, were convicted of robbery with homicide in the Philippines and sentenced to death. Their appeals and motions for reconsideration were denied, and they were executed by lethal injection. The counsel for the victims then sought help from the UN Human Rights Committee, alleging that the death penalty was unconstitutional except for the most heinous crimes. However, the Committee found no violation of the ICCPR and reiterated that the Philippines breached its obligations by executing the individuals before the Committee had finished reviewing the case.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    188 views1 page

    Piandiong Vs The Philippines (Case Summary)

    Uploaded by

    Ma. Fabiana Garcia
    Three individuals, Piandiong, Morallos, and Bulan, were convicted of robbery with homicide in the Philippines and sentenced to death. Their appeals and motions for reconsideration were denied, and they were executed by lethal injection. The counsel for the victims then sought help from the UN Human Rights Committee, alleging that the death penalty was unconstitutional except for the most heinous crimes. However, the Committee found no violation of the ICCPR and reiterated that the Philippines breached its obligations by executing the individuals before the Committee had finished reviewing the case.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 1

    1

    PIANDIONG VS THE PHILIPPINES

    Communication No. 869/1999

    December 20, 2000

    Piandiong, Morallos, and Bulan were convicted of robbery with homicide and were
    sentenced to death. Their appeal and motions for reconsideration were denied and no
    clemency was granted to them by the Office of the President. They were all executed by
    lethal injection.

    The counsel of the victims sought the aid of the Human Rights Committee, alleging
    that the death penalty was unconstitutional and should not have been imposed for
    anything but the most heinous crimes.

    It was held in this case that the Committee cannot make a finding of a violation of
    any of the articles of the ICCPR. It also reiterated its conclusion that the State committed
    a grave breach of its obligations under the Protocol by putting the alleged victims to death
    before the Committee had concluded its considerations of the communication.

    Human Rights Law mfbgarcia

    You might also like