Loading...
Publication
Limites imanentes ao direito de defesa - A legítima defesa e o uso de armas de fogo
| Name: | Description: | Size: | Format: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 959.49 KB | Adobe PDF |
Authors
Advisor(s)
Abstract(s)
O estudo visa analisar a legítima defesa enquanto uma das ações excludentes da ilicitude e das formas mais antigas de realização, abreviada, da justiça penal, procurando garantir uma oportuna reação contra o injusto e potenciando a eficiente resolução da violação da Ordem Jurídica. O seu frequente uso, despoleta o surgimento de situações controversas, em especial no que tange à aferição dos seus limites. O enquadramento jurídico pátrio não oferece, de forma clara, limites específicos para esta causa de justificação, limitando-se genericamente que o suficiente é a escolha do meio necessário e seu uso moderado. Levantam-se, deste modo, questões sobre o meio utilizado pela vítima para reagir a uma agressão e até que ponto essa reação deixa de estar sob o manto da legítima defesa, e passar, ela própria a ser agressão.
Procurou-se, por meio de pesquisa doutrinária e jurisprudencial, definir formas de dirimir estas questões. Constatou-se que, não existindo uma paridade de armas, deve garantir-se a escolha do meio menos lesivo, devendo a vítima valer-se dos meios que estiverem ao seu alcance para encerrar a agressão. Num Estado de direito democrático e social, impõe-se a ponderação de valores em conflito, devendo ser sempre enquadrar-se ação num contexto de moderação, e de uso do meio necessário até o ponto em que um agressor encerre sua conduta. Destacamos a não ilimitação, a ponderação e o bom senso da ação defensiva, procurando alertar para a dificuldade de, no momento da agressão, impor à vítima a escolha minuciosa das armas a utilizar, bem como a concreta medição da consequência da sua ação.
The study aims to analyze self-defense as one of the legal justifications for the use of force, and one of the oldest forms of performing, proportionally, criminal justice. It seeks to ensure a timely reaction against an unfair and potentially dangerous situation, with an efficient resolution of the violation of the legal order. Its frequent use triggers controversy, especially regarding the measurement of its limits. The Portuguese national legal framework does not offer clear specific limits for this justification, but merely considering the necessary means that are chosen, and its moderate use. Therefore, questions were raised on the means used by the victim to respond to an aggression and to what extent this reaction is covered by self defense, and when it becomes in itself an aggression. It was sought through doctrinal and jurisprudential research, to define ways to resolve these issues. It was found that when there is an absence of equality of reasonable force, self defense should be ensured through the choice of the least harmful mean, having the victim to avail means, within their power, to prevent aggression. In a social and democratic rule of law, it imposes the consideration of all conflicting values. Actions should always be framed in a context of moderation and only the use of means of defence to the extent that an aggressor quits his conduct. We highlight the no-limitlessness and good sense of the defensive action, warning about the difficulty of imposing to the victim, at the time of the assault, the right choice of weapons, its right usage, as well as the concrete measurement of the results of the victim’s actions.
The study aims to analyze self-defense as one of the legal justifications for the use of force, and one of the oldest forms of performing, proportionally, criminal justice. It seeks to ensure a timely reaction against an unfair and potentially dangerous situation, with an efficient resolution of the violation of the legal order. Its frequent use triggers controversy, especially regarding the measurement of its limits. The Portuguese national legal framework does not offer clear specific limits for this justification, but merely considering the necessary means that are chosen, and its moderate use. Therefore, questions were raised on the means used by the victim to respond to an aggression and to what extent this reaction is covered by self defense, and when it becomes in itself an aggression. It was sought through doctrinal and jurisprudential research, to define ways to resolve these issues. It was found that when there is an absence of equality of reasonable force, self defense should be ensured through the choice of the least harmful mean, having the victim to avail means, within their power, to prevent aggression. In a social and democratic rule of law, it imposes the consideration of all conflicting values. Actions should always be framed in a context of moderation and only the use of means of defence to the extent that an aggressor quits his conduct. We highlight the no-limitlessness and good sense of the defensive action, warning about the difficulty of imposing to the victim, at the time of the assault, the right choice of weapons, its right usage, as well as the concrete measurement of the results of the victim’s actions.
Description
Keywords
legítima defesa necessidade do meio proporcionalidade da defesa limitação da defesa proteção de bens