Necessary defense and extreme emergency
Necessary defense is the most discussed of the circumstances of justification. Basically, the one who commits an act otherwise criminal, not for such conduct criminally liable if he committed in necessary defense.In self defense, therefore, considers such action, which distract someone directly threatened or ongoing attack on the interests protected by criminal law (usually an attack against the life or health or attack against the property). Therefore, in order was a necessary defense to such an attack directly threatened, ie. threat must be real and immediate, not enough, as if such a threat exists in the distant future. Of course it is a necessary defensive act against an attack that has already begun but not finished. It is therefore necessary defense, if you use a knife attacker with a knife who attacked you, but it is not necessary defense, if such an attacker in their actions and you stopped him with a knife and starts to attack him.
Another important condition is the adequacy of the defense. It is not self defense if it is manifestly unreasonable manner of attack (the thief who is trying to steal a purse definitely can not shoot, or at least not with impunity).
A similar circumstances excluding the unlawfulness is extreme emergency. Extreme hardship is action that would in other circumstances might be a criminal offense, but he committed the offender in a situation where imminent danger averted directly (eg you see the parking lot on a hot day in a locked car sitting alone a small child who clearly suffer from the heat inside cars, car owner for a long time and does not return the child at risk of health damage. In this case, glass breaking car in order to assist the negotiations in extreme poverty). Even in case of extreme emergency must be a reasonable action. If the risk aversion is the same or worse than the aftermath of the threatened, can be an extreme emergency. The extreme poverty will not go well when direct danger could be averted otherwise than an act that can be considered a criminal.
The question of self-defense or extreme emergency is one of the most complex issues of criminal law and assess whether it is a necessary defense or extreme distress always depends on many factors.
The new Penal Code in addition to self-defense and extreme distress explicitly defined circumstances excluding other unlawful conduct that would be a criminal offense. These include approval of the victim (eg, give someone permission to spray-painted your house – not a criminal act logically). Must go but the consent given in advance. The consent of the victim but does not relieve the offender of criminal liability in cases where the injury or death (even if someone asked you, let him break all the ribs, you can not do it with impunity).
Other circumstances excluding the unlawfulness of the so-called acceptable risk . It concerns situations where the offender performs work , which has expertise and will do everything to avoid damage , but it will still effect that could be considered a criminal offense (as if I dispose of a tall chimney blaster and do everything according to best of their knowledge and experience in accordance with established procedures to hurt anyone and yet the chimney will fall on the neighboring house will not be a crime). This applies also need to research on drugs when they come up for testing on humans. In such cases, could cause a health hazard must be prior consent of those whom it touches.
Finally, the last circumstances justified the use of weapons . This applies particularly to members of the armed forces, especially police officers, who used a weapon in the service procedure. Must go, however, such use of weapon, which was conducted in accordance with applicable legislation, např.se Act on the Police of the Czech Republic.
Líbí se vám naše stránky? Podělte se o ně s kamarády.
|Sdílet na Facebooku||