Causes of Justification in Criminal Law: A Comprehensive Guide
* 3. Compliance with the duty and exercise of a right, office, or position: It is a defense to criminal liability that covers actions that violate the legal rights whose fulfillment is a duty or right of the individual copyright holder. Referred to in Article 20.7 of the Criminal Code, which refers, in addition to the exercise of a right, to an office or position. As justification requirements are required:
- a. That the subject asset is a public official authorized to make use of violent means in the exercise of the duties of his office and to exercise violence on the occasion of it.
- b. Specifically, the line of duty required to use violence (need abstract).
- c. The concrete violence used is as low as possible for the intended purpose, i.e., to use the least dangerous and least invasive means possible under the specific circumstances (in particular need).
- d. That the force used is proportionate to the seriousness of the situation giving rise to the intervention.
If any of the first two requirements are missing, the defense cannot be seen, even as incomplete, as they are essential requirements. Yes, incomplete fit to apply the defense is missing a specific need or proportionality. Due Obedience: The term “due obedience” referred to cases of exemption from responsibility for compliance with an order of illegal content. It requires the existence of a hierarchical relationship (so that the order can be understood emanating from a higher authority, without being sufficient for this purpose a family relationship or employment), the abstract competence of the issuer of the order to accomplish it.
* 4. The consent of the taxpayer, is not considered by the codes as a justification, even if it means lack of interest (there is no explicit reference). It has a double virtuality:
- a. Cause of atypicality: when it is legally available and is incorporated as an element of the type. For example, property crimes or released.
- b. Cause of justification: cases in which there is a budget agreement. On the one hand, we have cases in which it is legally available. For example, in a neighboring community, one left the tap running and assumes that you can enter your home to save the situation. On the other hand, lesions or those affecting life in the case of legal goods not available, the consent of the subject has a relative effectiveness.
ITEM 21 – CAUSE OF JUSTIFICATION OF CRIMINAL CODE:
* 1. Self-defense: defense of criminal responsibility to safeguard actions excuse or self made against unlawful violence against a person or their rights. In Article 20.4 of the Criminal Code, it must meet the following requirements:
- a. unlawful aggression, defined as actual aggression unlawful.
- b. The need for defense.
- c. No provocation of aggression.
Some authors regarding aggression require that the actions are typical of an intentional criminal and guilty, without regard to the status of the offender guilty. We distinguish between the need for any protective behavior (abstract need of defense) and the need for defensive half concrete used (specific need of defense), which is not met if a subject could choose a less harmful. It should distinguish here between:
- § Vast excess: an excess there is no need for action is a mistake by the subject in which there is no need for intervention (because of putative justification that leads me to an error).
- § Excess intensive: an excessive use of the media (or unreasonable use of the media).
Under the condition of lack of sufficient provocation for provocation defense means proportionate and appropriate to the institution of aggression. The agent must act with knowledge of presenting the elements of self-defense.
* 2. The state of necessity: is a ground for excluding criminal responsibility which exempts actions to safeguard their own or others made in the context of an actual danger to one or more interests that can only be avoided injuring another or other interests. In Article 20.5 of the Criminal Code, both case law and doctrine together a range of requirements to apply:
- a. That the evil done is not greater than that try to avoid.
- b. That the situation of need was not caused intentionally by the subject.
- c. That the need has not, by their office or position, turn sacrificarse. A obligation, the situation of necessity requires the presence of a real and present danger of producing a serious evil own or someone else.
Safeguard action should be an ideal which constitutes the least harmful and that in any case, according to a weighting of the various interests involved and not just property, cause a lesser evil or evil as it is avoided. The acting subject must do so with knowledge of presenting the items of necessity.