PENAL CODE of the Democratic Republic of Timor Leste CHAPTER V CAUSES FOR EXCLUSION SECTION I CAUSES FOR EXCLUSION OF UNLAWFULNESS Article 43. Exclusion of unlawfulness 1. When the unlawfulness of an act, considered in its entirety, is excluded by the legal system, the same shall not be liable to criminal punishment. 2. Specifically, any act committed in exercise of a right or performance of a duty, in legitimate defense, a state of justifying need or with consent, is not unlawful. Article 44. Legitimate defense An act constitutes legitimate defense when committed as the necessary means to repel an imminent or present unlawful attack on legally protected interests of the perpetrator or of a third party. Article 45. State of justifying need An act is not unlawful when committed as an appropriate means to avert a present danger that threatens legally protected interests of the perpetrator or of a third party, if the following requisites are met: a) There is significant superiority of the interest to be safeguarded in relation to the interest sacrificed; and b) It is reasonable to impose the sacrifice of the interest of the victim, considering the nature or value of the interest endangered. Article 46. Conflict of duties 1. It is not unlawful for a person to commit, in the case of conflict in performance of legal duties or legitimate orders from an authority, a duty or order of equal or superior value to that sacrificed. 2. Duty to obey hierarchical superiors ceases when the same leads to commission of a crime. Article 47. Consent 1. In addition to special cases provided for in law, consent excludes unlawfulness when it refers to freely available legal interests and the act does not offend social mores. 2. Consent may be expressed by any means revealing a free, honest and informed will of the holder of the protected legal interest, and it may be freely withdrawn at any time before the execution of the act. 3. Consent is effective only if it has been given by someone who is over 16 years of age and has the necessary discernment to judge its meaning and scope, at the moment it is given. 4. If consent is not known to the perpetrator, he or she shall be punishable with the penalty applicable to attempt. 5. Effective consent will be considered equivalent to presumed consent, when the situation, in which the perpetrator is acting, reasonably permits one to suppose that the holder of the legally protected interest would have effectively given consent to the act, if the same had known the circumstances in which it was committed. 15