8/15/2019 Self-Defense Research 04212016

1/4

Self-Defense(source: http://www.abogadomo.com/law-professor/law-professor-archives/self-

defense )

Our criminal laws provide for instances where a person may defend himself and notbe prosecuted for what would normally be a criminal action. Under Section 1,

Article 11 of the Revised Penal Code of the Philippines, the following do notincur any criminal liability:

“Anyone who acts in defense of his person or rights, provided that the followingcircumstances concur

!irst. Unlawful aggression.

"econd. Reasonale necessit! of the "eans e"#lo!ed to #revent or repel it.

 #hird. $ac% of su&cient #rovocation on the #art of the #erson defendinghi"self.$

 #he %ustifying circumstance of self-defense “is an a&rmative allegation that must beproven with certainty by su&cient, satisfactory and convincing evidence thate'cludes any vestige of criminal aggression on the part of the person invo(ing it.$)People v. *acuspag, ++ "A +0 1+23045 6here the accused has admitted thathe is the author of the death of the deceased, it is incumbent upon the appellant, inorder to avoid criminal liability, to prove this %ustifying circumstance )self-defense5claimed by him, to the satisfaction of the court. #o do so, he must rely on thestrength of his own evidence, and not on the wea(ness of the prosecution for evenif it were wea(, it could not be disbelieved after the accused admitted the (illing.

7t is basic that for self-defense to prosper, the following re'uisites "ust concur:)+5 there must be unlawful aggression by the victim )05 that the means employedto prevent or repel such aggression were reasonable and )85 that there was lack of sucient provocation on the part of the person defending  himself. 6e shall nowdiscuss the following re9uisites in detail:

A. nlawful Aggression:

nlawful aggression presupposes an actual or i""inent danger on the life orli" of a #erson. ;ere shouting, intimidating or threatening attitude of the victim,assuming that to be true, does not constitute unlawful aggression. eal aggressionpresupposes an act positively strong, showing the wrongful intent of the aggressor,which is not merely a threatening or intimidating attitude, but a material attac(.

8/15/2019 Self-Defense Research 04212016

2/4

attac(. Although a (nife is more dangerous than a club, its use is reasonable if thereis no other available means of defense at the disposal of the accused.

. ?ac( of su&cient provocation on the part of the person defending himself:

“"u&cient$ means proportionate to the damage caused by the act, and ade9uate to

stir one to its commission. "#uting to a #erson the utterance of vulgarlanguage is su&cient #rovocation. #his element refers to the person defendinghimself and is essentially inseparable and co-e'istent with the idea of self-defense.

)source: http://www.manilatimes.net/one-can-claim-self-defense-only-under-speci@c-circumstances/++2/ by Chief / Atty. Persida Acosta5

 6hile self-defense is a legally recogni>ed %usti@cation for committing an act thatwould ordinarily be considered as a crime such as (illing or in%uring a person, youshould (now that the law re9uires the presence of speci@c circumstances before itcan be availed of as a proper legal defense. #he evised Penal ode of thePhilippines )P5 provides that:

Art. 11. *ustif!ing circu"stances. B #he following do not incur any criminalliability:

1. An!one who acts in defense of his #erson or rights, provided thefollowing circumstances concur:

!irst. nlawful aggression"econd. easonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel it #hird. ?ac( of su&cient provocation on the part of the person defending

himself.$

!irst, one of the circumstances that is re9uired to be present to avail the defense of self-defense is the presence of unlawful aggression. #he "upreme ourt elaboratedon this matter in one of its decisions, which states that:C“A person who invo(es self-defense has the burden of proof of proving all theelements. Dowever, the most important among all the elements is the element of unlawful aggression. nlawful aggression must be proved @rst in order for self-defense to be successfully pleaded, whether complete or incomplete. As this courtsaid in People v. atbagan, “#here can be no self-defense, whether complete orincomplete, unless the victim had committed unlawful aggression against theperson who resorted to self-defense.$

''' ''' '''nlawful aggression is an actual physical assault, or at least a threat to inEict realimminent in%ury, upon a person. 7n case of threat, it must be oFensive and strong,positively showing the wrongful intent to cause in%ury. 7t “presupposes actual,sudden, une'pected or imminent dangerBnot merely threatening and intimidatingaction.$ 7t is present “only when the one attac(ed faces real and immediate threatto oneGs life$ )People of the Philippines vs. Dolorido, H.. *o. +2+0+, Ianuary +0,0J++5.

http://www.manilatimes.net/one-can-claim-self-defense-only-under-specific-circumstances/161759/http://www.manilatimes.net/one-can-claim-self-defense-only-under-specific-circumstances/161759/http://www.manilatimes.net/one-can-claim-self-defense-only-under-specific-circumstances/161759/http://www.manilatimes.net/one-can-claim-self-defense-only-under-specific-circumstances/161759/

8/15/2019 Self-Defense Research 04212016

3/4

"econd, the re9uirement of reasonable necessity of the means used to defend oneGsself from an unlawful aggression entails the use of reasonable means of self-defense that is commensurate to the nature and the e'tent of the attac( sought tobe averted )People of the Philippines vs.

8/15/2019 Self-Defense Research 04212016

4/4

present;

First. hat the evil sought to be avoided actually e%ists;

Second. hat the in(ury feared be greater than that done to avoid it;

hird. hat there be no other practical and less harmful means of preventing

it.chanrobles virtual lawlibrary

5. Any person who acts in the fulfillment of a duty or in the lawful

exercise of a right or office.chanrobles virtuallawlibrary

). Any person who acts in obedience to an order issued by a superior for

some lawful purpose. chanroblesvirtual lawl

ibrary

Art. 12. Circumstances which exempt from criminal liability . — the

following are exempt from criminal liability:

1. An imbecile or an insane person, unless the latter has acted during a lucid

interval.chanrobles virtual la

w library

*hen the imbecile or an insane person has committed an act which the law

defines as a felony +delito, the court shall order his confinement in one of 

the hospitals or asylums established for persons thus afflicted, which he shall

not be permitted to leave without first obtaining the permission of the same

court.chanroblesvirtual lawlibrary

#. A person under nine years of age. chanroblesvirtual lawlibrary

&. A person over nine years of age and under fifteen, unless he has actedwith discernment, in which case, such minor shall be proceeded against in

accordance with the provisions of Art. - of this /ode. chanrobles virtual lawlibrary

*hen such minor is ad(udged to be criminally irresponsible, the court, in

conformably with the provisions of this and the preceding paragraph, shall

commit him to the care and custody of his family who shall be charged with

his surveillance and education otherwise, he shall be committed to the care

of some institution or person mentioned in saidArt. -. chanroblesvirtual lawlibrary

'. Any person who, while performing a lawful act with due care, causes an

in(ury by mere accident without fault or intention of causing it. chanroblesvirtual lawlibrary

5. Any person who act under the compulsion of irresistible force.chanrobles virtuallawlibrary

). Any person who acts under the impulse of an uncontrollable fear of an

e$ual or greater in(ury.chanrobles virtual lawlibrary

0. Any person who fails to perform an act re$uired by law, when prevented

by some lawful insuperable cause. chanrobles virtual lawlibrary