This document summarizes the justifying circumstances under Article 11 of the Revised Penal Code, including self-defense, state of necessity, fulfillment of duty, and obedience to superior orders. It discusses the requisites for each circumstance and provides examples from case law. Specifically, it outlines the requirements for unlawful aggression and reasonable necessity in self-defense claims, as well as defenses of one's relatives, property, and strangers. It also defines the conditions for invoking state of necessity and fulfilling one's duty.

1. LECTURER:
PO2 PATRICK MARZ AVELIN
JUSTIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES

2. ARTICLE 11 OF REVISED PENAL CODE
 a. Defense of oneself, of relatives, or
strangers;
 b. State of necessity
 c Fulfillment of duty
 d.Obedience of superior order

3. SELF-DEFENSE
a.Unlawful aggression;
b. Reasonable necessity of the means
employed to prevent or repel the unlawful
aggression; and
c.Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of
the person defending himself
INCLUDES : Defense of life,chastity, property
and honor.

4. UNLAWFUL AGGRESSION?
 Unlawful Aggression is the primordial
requisites which must at all time be present.
When unlawful aggression is absent, there is
no self-defense….

5. UNLAWFUL AGGRESSION?
 It must be actual,sudden, unexpected attack
or imminent danger thereof, not merely a
threatening or intimidating attitude.
 The accused must present proof of positively
strong act of real aggression.
 Unlawful aggression must be such as to put
in real peril the life or personal safety of the
person defending himself or of others being
defended and not imagined threat.

6. UNLAWFUL AGGRESSION?
 Unlawful aggression must be real or atleast
imminent.
 Real aggression means an attack with
physical force or with a weapon such as to
cause injury or danger to life or personal
safety.
 Aggression is imminent if an attack is
impending or at the point of happening.

7. UNLAWFUL AGGRESSION?
 When the aggression no longer exist,such as
when the aggressor ran away after the attack
or when the defender was able to wrest the
weapon from the aggressor, there is no need
for self-defense.
 The person defending himself must stop for
when aggression ceased and he still
continued to attack, HE THEN BECOMES
THE AGGRESSOR.

8. REASONABLE NECESSITY
 People v Gutual
- It does not imply commendurability between
the means of the attack and defense- the law
requires a rational equivalence which is determined
by the emergency, the imminent danger to which
the person attacked is exposed, and the instinct,
more than the reason, that moves or impels the
defense. The Proportionateness thereof does not
defend upon the harm done, but rests upon the
imminent danger of such injury.

9. REASONABLE NECESSITY
 US v Mojica
BEFORE – “retreat to the wall”- which makes
it duty of a person assailed to retreat as far as he
can before he meets the assault with force.
NOW- “Stand ground when in the right” which
now applies when the aggressor is armed with a
weapon and is especially more liberal if the person
attacked is a peace officer in the performance of
duty.

10. REASONABLE NECESSITY
 In defense of Chastity, there must be imminent or
immediate danger of rape to justify killing. If it were
only acts of lasciviousness, killing is an
unreasonable means. Intent to rape must be
present.
 Slander may be a necessary means to repel
slander. But it must not be more than needed to
defend oneself from the defamatory remarks.

11. DEFENSE OF PROPERTY
People v Narvaez April 20,1983
 In defense of property, killing is not justified.
Exception: There must be , in addition, the
necessity to save another life.
-If the aggression is on property, even if there
was no attack on the defender or owner or
possessor, defense is proper but not to the
extent of killing the aggression, otherwise the
means used to repel or prevent the aggression
will not be reasonable.

12. DOCTRINE OF SELF-HELP
 Article 429 of New Civil Code provides that “
the owner or lawful possessor of a thing has
the right to exclude any person from the
enjoyment and disposal thereof. For this
purpose , he may use such force as may be
reasonably necessary to repel or prevent an
actual or threatened unlawful physical
invasion or usurpation of his property.”

13. LACK OF SUFFICIENT PROVOCATION?
 It shows that there may have been
provocation but it should not be sufficient and
it must not immediately precede the act. It is
not enough that the provocative act be just
unreasonable or annoying.

14. LACK OF SUFFICIENT PROVOCATION?
Cano v. people Gr No. 155258 Oct 2003
a.No provocation at all was given to the
aggressor;
b.Even if provocation was given, it was not
sufficient;
c. Even if the provacation was sufficient, it was not
given by the person defending himself;
d.When given by the person defending himself, it
was not proximate and immediate to the act of
aggressor.

15. DEFENSE OF RELATIVES
 REQUISITES :
a. Unlawful Aggression
b. Reasonable necessity of the means
employed to prevent and repel the unlawful
aggression
c. In case the provocation was given by the
person attacked, the person defending had
no part therein

16. DEFENSE OF STRANGERS
a. Unlawful Aggression
b. Reasonable necessity of the means
employed to prevent and repel the unlawful
aggression.
c. Person defending is not induced by
revenge, resentment or other evil motives.
NOTE: Defense of relatives beyond the fourth
degree of consiguinity is defense of
stranger.

17. STATE OF NECESSITY
REQUISITES:
a. The evil sought to be avoided actually exists;
b. The injury feared be greater than that done to
avoid it;
c. There is no other practical and less harmful
means of preventing it.
NOTE: The state of necessity must not be caused
by the negligence or violation of the law of the
actor otherwise this benefit cannot be invoked.

18. FULFILLEMENT OF DUTY
REQUISITES:
a. The offender acted in the performance of
duty or lawful exercise of a right or office;
b. The injury caused or the offense committed
is the necessary consequences of the due
performance such as right or office.

19. FULFILLMENT OF DUTY
German Mngt and Services Inc V. Court of
Appeals
177 SCRA 495.
Under the doctrine of self help in Article 249 of the
Civil Code justifies the act of the owner or lawful
possessor of a thing to use force necessary to
protect his proprietary or possessory rights. He
must however exercise this right at the very
moment that he is being deprived of his
property. When possessioni has already been
lost, he must resort to judicial process in
reclaiming his property.

20. OBEDIENCE TO SUPERIOR ORDER
 REQUISITES :
a. An order has been issued by a superior.
b. The order is for a legal purpose;
c. The means used to carry out such order is
lawful.

21. OBEDIENCE TO SUPERIOR ORDER
 Tabuena vs Sandiganbayan
HELD : Even if the order of the superior is
illegal, if it appears to be legal and the
subordinate is not aware of its illegality, the
subordinate is not liable.