This review explores justifiable defense standards in public security cases, highlighting legal clarifications and practical misconceptions.
This article centers on the newly added system of justifiable defense after the revision of the "Law of the People's Republic of China on Administrative Penalties for Public Security", systematically expounding on the background of review, identification standards, practical errors, and key points of review regarding defense facts in public security cases. The article points out that the new law clarifies that justifiable defense is not illegal, emphasizing that "the law cannot compromise with illegality", reversing the previous inertia in identifying "mutual assault". The identification of defense requires comprehensive consideration of the five major elements: the cause, time, object, subjective intention, and limits of defense, combined with analysis of typical cases. At the same time, it points out the misunderstandings in practice such as "vague identification of mutual assault" and "result-oriented approach", proposing to establish a judgment standard of "unity of subjectivity and objectivity", comprehensively review evidence, objectively restore the defense situation, and ensure citizens exercise their defense rights according to law.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
J. W. Dong (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: