You are on page 1of 7

Justifying Circumstances

- there is no crime
- no criminal liability; no civil liability (except par. 4)
- the acts are justified (persons are not criminals)
- burden of proof: lies on the accused

1. Self-Defense

Requisites:
a. Unlawful aggression
b. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel it
c. Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending himself

Aggression
- condition sine qua non to invoke self-defense; indispensible element
- must be offensive and criminal, continuous and non-mutual
- 2 kinds
a. actual a material attack; the aggressor shows wrongful intent by committing the unlawful
aggression; danger must be present (actual danger must be repelled)

b. imminent attack is at the point of happening (imminent danger must be prevented)

Note:
- Insulting words, without physical assault, does not constitute unlawful aggression
- Under the new Civil Code, a person may use force or violence to protect his property (exercise
of a right; not unlawful aggression)
- When aggressor flees, unlawful aggression ceases

Stand ground when in the right


- where the accused is where he has the right to be, the law does not require him to retreat when
his assailant is rapidly advancing upon him with a deadly weapon
- new rule (old rule : retreat to the wall)
- reason: if one flees from the aggressor, he runs the risk of being attacked by the latter

Unlawful aggression in defense of other rights


- defense of right to chastity
- defense of property (only when coupled with attack on the person)
- defense of home (manner of entry constitute unlawful aggression)

Test of reasonableness of the means used will depend upon:

- the nature and quality of weapons


- physical condition, character and size
- other circumstances considered

Requisites of 3rd element:


a. no provocation given by the person defending himself
b. if there is provocation, it is insufficient
c. if there is provocation, it is not given by the person defending himself
d. if there is provocation, it is not proximate and immediate to the act of aggression

Battered Woman Syndrome (BWS) as a Defense


- Under Rep. Act 9262 VAWC
- Sec. 26: Victims who are suffering from BWS do not incur criminal and civil liability even if
the requisites of self-defense are not present

Battered Woman
- a woman who is repeatedly subjected to any forceful physical or psychological behavior by a
man in order to coerce her to do something he wants her to do without concern for her rights
- characterized by a cycle of violence (the tension building phase the acute battering syndrome
the loving or non-violent phase)

Land mark cases:


- People vs. Alconga (page 163, 2008 ed.)
- People vs. Dolfo (page 188, 2008 ed.)

2. Defense of Relatives

Persons who can be defended:


a. spouses
b. ascendants
c. descendants
d. legitimate, natural or adopted brothers and sisters, or relatives by affinity in the same degrees
e. relatives within the fourth civil degree

Requisites:
a. Unlawful aggression
b. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel it
c. Lack of participation in relatives provocation

3. Defense of Strangers

Stranger anyone not considered as a relative

Requisites:
a. Unlawful aggression
b. Reasonable necessity of the means employed
c. The person defending be not induced by revenge, resentment or other evil motive (actuated by
generous or uninterested motive)

4. Avoidance of Greater Evil or Injury

- also known as the State of Necessity

Requisites:
a. The evil sought to be avoided actually exists
b. The injury feared is greater than that done to avoid it
c. There is no other practical and less harmful means of preventing it

The instinct of self-preservation will always make one feel that his own safety is of greater
importance than that of another.

There is a civil liability under this circumstance. The person to whom the benefit is attributed
shall be civilly liable to the person who received the harm or damage. The civil liability shall be
in proportion to the benefit received.

5. Fulfillment of Duty

Requisites:
a. The accused must have acted in the performance of a duty
b. The injury caused or offense should have been the necessary consequence of due performance
of duty

Landmark case: People vs. Felipe Delima (Page 205, 2008 ed. / 46 Phil. 738)

Requisites of Exercise of Rights:


a. The accused must have acted in the exercise of right
b. The injury caused or the offense committed should have been the necessary consequence of
lawful exercise of duty

Exercise of Office (Example)


- executioner of Bilibid prison is not liable for murder
- surgeon who amputated the leg of a patient to save the latter is not guilty of mutilation

6. Obedience to an Order for Some Lawful Purpose

Requisites:
a. An order has been issued by a superior
b. Such order must be for some lawful purpose
c. The means used by the subordinate to carry out said order is lawful

Note:
- The subordinate is not liable for carrying out an illegal order of his superior, if he is not aware
of the illegality of the order and he is not negligent.

You might also like