Legitimate Self Defense in Costa Rica – What is it and when can you use it? A ‘must read’ for gun owners…

“When wanting to defend yourself turns into vengeance, it is no longer a legitimate defense…” Penal Attorney.

Nowadays the press frequently informs about events in which a citizen has faced –or even used a firearm against- a delinquent that was robbing a person, or committing burglary in a domestic home or a commercial business place.

In principle, anyone would think that actions like these find themselves fully protected by and within legal order; however, the law requires the fulfillment of certain requisites that are indispensable to the admittance of said actions as a legitimate defense, given that were this not to happen, actions that appear to be justified but in reality are not may incur.

There are those that believe that possessing a firearm – with its respective permission of use – automatically means that they have the license to shoot against any circumstance of danger to themselves or to a third person. This is a flawed notion given that there exists a very faint and blurry dividing line between an action that is justified by law (does not constitute a crime) and an action that trespasses the law (constituting a crime).

Essential requisites. The requisites are contemplated in the Penal Code (Código Penal) and are the same – without any sort of distinction – for all citizens; also, these must be fulfilled as well by those who offer security services in neighborhoods or residential areas, condominiums and businesses, regardless of them being public or private services.

Firstly, it must be noted that the legal order does not impose to people that they must run away in a dangerous situation, and much less does it encourage any sort of heroic conduct. But the law concedes the option of exercising a legitimate defense when it is indispensable and under determined special circumstances.

A legitimate defense consists in a right to “repel” an aggressive action that is in full execution, or to avoid an aggression that is “imminent” but has not been yet executed; this is to say, if the aggression already happened or finalized, acting in legitimate defense would be too late.

For instance, many people wrongly believe that they can shoot a fleeing aggressor in the back when he/she is still within private property. But this could legally constitute homicide if said person were to die.

Nevertheless, it is different when the aggressor is fleeing with stolen good in his hands, given that the aggressive action is in full execution (injury to property rights) and it would be viable to act in a necessary manner in order to repel the aggressive action. But this would never justify a disproportionate action, and even less a beating or posterior lynching – as it has already happened in numerous occasions. Those who act that way wrongly believe to be under the protection of lawful defense.

Thus, wanting to defend yourself at all times is inescapable, but when defense turns into an act of vengeance, it is no longer a lawful and legitimate defense.

What is defended?: It must be clearly noted that the law establishes that it is possible to act in legitimate defense of a “person or rights”; what this means is that you may defend human life or the integrity of a persons physical attributes, as much as rights such as private property, intimacy, etc.

In the same manner, the law specifically establishes as defendable those rights that are “one’s own or other people’s”, which means that a person is acting legitimately when defending themselves, or a third person and/or their rights when said third person is victim of a dangerous threat or infliction.

Furthermore, another essential requisite is the previous existence of an “illegitimate aggression”, which must have a certain character that will be verified as an unjustified action, and that can be repelled if it is in full execution or avoided when it is imminent.

It is important to note that the law establishes as another essential requisite the “reasonable necessity of the employed defense”. This means that you may use whatever medium in order to execute the defense, but this must proceed in a reasonable manner against the aggressor.

For instance, if the aggressor uses a baseball bat it does not imply that in order to defend yourself (or a third person) one is obliged to use a similar object, but you might as well use an object that will inflict a greater damage (i.e. a firearm). But this object must be used reasonably in every case (i.e. repelling an action could be enough by shooting the aggressor in the leg, but shooting the aggressor five times in vital parts of the body is considered a disproportionate defense).

What are the consequences of exceeding the limits of legitimate defense?: If someone who exercises defense does not act accordingly these requisites (for instance, if someone exceeds the “reasonableness” mentioned in the last paragraph), he or she may be incurring in an “excess of defense” and with it he or she is exposed to a penal sanction that could be discretely attenuated by a judge; however if the described requisites are not fulfilled at all, said person would be responsible for an inexcusable crime that would lead to the imposition of severe penal sanctions without the possibility of attenuation.

This is how things are, and I wish that nobody carried firearms in this country, but the reality is another given that many people acquire such weapons in order to protect themselves, but do not know the risks and possible legal repercussions that their bad use may lead to. This is why it is important that citizens at least inform themselves about the legal requisites to a lawful and legitimate defense and so that they can avoid turning –in a matter of seconds- from victims to aggressors, and all penal consequences to that fact.

MSc. J. Federico Campos C.
JFC – Asesoría & Litigio Penal.
Tel Office: (506) 2280-7060.
Tel Cel: (506) 8858-4747.
San José, Costa Rica.

Note from Scott Oliver – Founder of WeLoveCostaRica.com:

This should not be construed as legal advice but supposedly there are three requirements that must be met for the victim to be able to use deadly force:

1. There must be an imminent attack without provocation.
2. There is no other option available to prevent the attack.
3. The victim should not use excessive force against the attacker.

It is legal to act in defence of yourself, or in the defence of another person in imminent danger however, it is not legal to fire on someone if they are running away from you.

[custom_script adID=97]

Andrew Makarik

to@welovecostarica.com

Andrew Makarik is the main editor of WeLoveCostaRica, a fan of this sunny country. He is also a loving husband and a has a lovely daughter. By being a devoted family man and the biggest Costa Rica fan, he wants to make more people feel at home there. WeLoveCostaRica unites people and helps them find new home or a new travel destination. This website is a friendly community where everyone can find not only information, but also new friends and travel pals. Andrew is also passionate about IT and programming, so he himself maintains a friendly atmosphere in this cozy environment of WeLoveCostaRica.com.