Justifying

circumstances

RICKY RUSSELL PAUL OBIENDA VALBAREZ

 SUBTOPICS
DEFINITION OF TERMS
THEORIES OF JUSTIFICATION
JUSTIFYING CIRCUMSTANCE:
DEADLY vs EQUAL FORCE
THE PHILIPPINE CRIMINAL LAW:
CIRCUMSTANCES THAT
AFFECT CRIMINAL LIABILITY
SELF DEFENSE
DEFINITION OF TERMS

Crime – an offense punishable by law;

illegal acts.
Law – a rule enacted or customary in a
community and recognized as
commanding or forbidding
0 certain actions.
Justify – to show justice or correctness of.
Circumstance – fact, occurrence, or
condition, esp. connected with or
influencing an event.
THEORIES OF JUSTIFICATION: REASONS vs DEEDS

SCENARIO

Person X is walking one night on a narrow

street. It was dark, quite late, and on the
other end he saw Person Y approaching
fast with something on the right hand.
Alarmed, X assaulted Y.
THE REASONS THEORY

Also called the “Subjective Theory”

The standard formulation provides that an actor
is justified if he believes that the conduct is
necessary to defend against unlawful
aggression, to make an arrest, to maintain order
on the vehicle, and so on.
Under the "reasons theory”, a person will get a
justification defense as long as he or she
believes that the justifying circumstances exist.
THE DEEDS THEORY

Also called the “Objective Theory”

The rationale for justification ought to be
that the conduct was something that we
were content to have the actor perform
under the justifying circumstances and to
have others perform under similar
circumstances in the future.
 JUSTIFYING CIRCUMSTANCE:
DEADLY and EQUAL FORCE

Any form of physical attack qualifies as deadly force

depending on contributing circumstances, Chief Insp. Nonilo
Poliquit (Ret.) wrote in 1998.
In turn, the concept of equal force allows any law-abiding
citizen to respond to deadly force with little or no more force
than that which he perceives is being directed against him.
It can be raised by any person who, in order to avoid an evil
or injury, does an act which causes damage to another,
provided that the “evil sought to be avoided actually exists”
 THE PHILIPPINE CRIMINAL LAW: CIRCUMSTANCES
THAT AFFECT CRIMINAL LIABILITY

The presence of certain

circumstances have the effect
of removing, mitigating or
aggravating criminal liability of
persons. Persons who commit
crimes when justifying
circumstances are present do
not incur criminal or civil
liability. Acting in self-defense
is one of these justifying
THE PHILIPPINE CRIMINAL LAW: CIRCUMSTANCES
THAT AFFECT CRIMINAL LIABILITY

The presence of exempting

circumstances on the other hand
will exempt the perpetrator from
criminal liability but not from civil
liability. Some of these exempting
circumstances are imbecility or
youth. On the other hand, the
presence of one or more
mitigating circumstances when a
crime is committed, can serve to
reduce the penalty imposed. An
example is voluntary surrender.
THE PHILIPPINE CRIMINAL LAW: CIRCUMSTANCES
THAT AFFECT CRIMINAL LIABILITY

Lastly, the presence of

aggravating circumstances will
increase the penalty imposed
under the crime, upon conviction.
Some examples are contempt or
insult to public authority.
 SELF DEFENSE

Our criminal laws provide for

instances where a person may
defend himself and not be
prosecuted for what would
normally
Under be a11criminal
Section 1, Article action.
of the Revised
Penal Code of the Philippines, the following do
not incur any criminal liability:
 Unlawful aggression.
 Reasonable necessity of the means
employed to prevent or repel it.
 Lack of sufficient provocation on the
part of the person defending
himself.
 SELF DEFENSE

The justifying circumstance of self-defense

"is an affirmative allegation that must be
proven with certainty by sufficient,
satisfactory and convincing evidence that
excludes any vestige of criminal
aggression on the part of the person
invoking it.”
NOTHING FOLLOWS
 DETAILS OF REQUISITES FOR SELF DEFENSE

A. Unlawful Aggression:
Unlawful aggression presupposes an
actual or imminent danger on the life or
limb of a person. Mere shouting,
intimidating or threatening attitude of the
victim, assuming that to be true, does not
constitute unlawful aggression. Real
aggression presupposes an act positively
strong, showing the wrongful intent of the
aggressor, which is not merely a
threatening or intimidating attitude, but a
material attack.
 DETAILS OF REQUISITES FOR SELF DEFENSE

B. Reasonable necessity of the means

employed:
Whether the means employed is reasonable or
not, will depend upon the kind of weapon of the
aggressor, his physical condition, character, size,
and other circumstances as well as those of the
person attacked and the time and place of the
attack. Although a knife is more dangerous than a
club, its use is reasonable if there is no other
available means of defense at the disposal of the
accused.
 DETAILS OF REQUISITES FOR SELF DEFENSE

C. Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of

the person defending himself:
"Sufficient" means proportionate to the damage
caused by the act, and adequate to stir one to
its commission. Imputing to a person the
utterance of vulgar language is sufficient
provocation. This element refers to the person
defending himself and is essentially
inseparable and co-existent with the idea of
self-defense.