SC: Prove unlawful aggression first when pleading self-defense
In order for self-defense to be appreciated, the accused must be able to prove
by clear and convincing evidence the
following elements:
An accused who invokes self-defense has the
burden to prove all the aforesaid elements, the most important of which is
unlawful aggression. Being the basic
requirement in a plea of self-defense, unlawful aggression must be
proved first in order for
self-defense to be successfully pleaded, whether complete or
incomplete.[2] No self-defense can exist without unlawful aggression
since there is no attack that the accused will have to prevent or repel.[3]
(a) unlawful aggression on the part of the victim;
(b) reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel it; and
(c) lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending himself.[1]
An accused who invokes self-defense has the
burden to prove all the aforesaid elements, the most important of which is
unlawful aggression. Being the basic
requirement in a plea of self-defense, unlawful aggression must be
proved first in order for
self-defense to be successfully pleaded, whether complete or
incomplete.[2] No self-defense can exist without unlawful aggression
since there is no attack that the accused will have to prevent or repel.[3][1] People v. Gonzales, G.R. No. 195534, June 13, 2012.
[2] People v. Malicdem, G.R. No. 184601, November 12, 2012.
[3] Guevarra v. People, G.R. No. 170462, February 5, 2014.
