在国产涉案剧普遍追求强情节、快节奏的创作环境下，剧集《正当防卫》选择了一条不同的路。它不满 足于仅仅呈现办案过程，还试图以"正当防卫"为切口，探讨司法理念的进步与人性的复杂。 《 人民日报 》（ 2025年08月05日 20 版） (责编：卫嘉、白宇) 剧中人物段鸿山从检察官到嫌疑人的身份转变很有深意。他坐在曾经最熟悉的位置对面，成了被告人， 为自己的"正当防卫"进行辩护，这正是"如我在诉"的写照——司法者把自己放进当事人的处境中，更能 切身感受法与情的关系。 在叙事艺术上，3起相隔14年的案件判决形成镜像结构，共同映照司法理念进步。这样处理既保持了推 理剧的悬疑元素，又巧妙融合了正当防卫认定、反家暴等社会议题。特别是对"防卫限度"的情境化再 现，用视听语言让观众直观感受到，在命悬一线的危急时刻人们会如何抉择如何行动。 该剧用短短15集内容讲清了一个道理：真正的司法正义，需要执法者既保持专业理性，又具备将心比心 的温度。这是法律赢得公众信任的原因，也是司法观念与实践不断进步的体现。 （上海市闵行区 陈寒冰） ...

Core Viewpoint - The revised Public Security Administration Punishment Law will take effect on January 1, 2026, aiming to adapt to the changing social security landscape and improve legal frameworks for public security management [1][2]. Group 1: Key Changes in Law - The new law clarifies that actions taken to prevent ongoing illegal harm will not be penalized, promoting the concept of legitimate defense [2][3]. - For minors aged 14-16 and 16-18, the law now allows for detention in cases of serious initial violations, addressing concerns about repeat offenders [3][4]. - Specific provisions against bullying in schools have been established, mandating penalties for acts of bullying and requiring schools to report serious incidents [4]. Group 2: Animal Management Regulations - The law introduces penalties for failing to secure animals, leading to harm to others, including fines or detention [5][6]. - It also addresses the sale and breeding of dangerous animals, establishing a legal framework for enforcement [6]. Group 3: Record Management and Enforcement - The law stipulates that records of administrative violations can be sealed and not disclosed to any entity, enhancing privacy for individuals [7][8]. - It includes provisions for humane treatment of individuals facing detention, allowing for deferment under certain circumstances [7]. Group 4: New Offenses Added - New offenses have been added to the law, including actions that disrupt public transport, high-altitude throwing of objects, and unauthorized drone flights, which will now be subject to penalties [9]. - Other behaviors such as harassment, abuse of vulnerable individuals, and identity fraud have also been classified as punishable offenses [9].

Core Viewpoint - The newly revised Public Security Administration Punishment Law, effective from January 1 next year, establishes the legitimacy of self-defense measures for citizens against unlawful acts, marking a significant shift in the legal landscape regarding self-defense [1][2]. Group 1: Legal Changes - The new law explicitly allows citizens to take defensive actions to protect themselves or others, ensuring that those who act in self-defense are exempt from administrative penalties [1][2]. - The law outlines five specific scenarios that clarify the legality of self-defense, define the limits of defense, and establish the burden of proof, thereby providing a solid legal foundation for citizens to act in self-defense [2][3]. Group 2: Social Implications - The revision addresses the previous ambiguity in recognizing self-defense in public security cases, which often led to a culture of fear where victims hesitated to defend themselves due to potential legal repercussions [2][3]. - The change is expected to enhance public safety and restore confidence in the legal system, allowing individuals to distinguish right from wrong and promoting social justice [2][3].

Core Viewpoint - The revised Public Security Administration Punishment Law, effective from January 1 next year, emphasizes the legitimacy of self-defense, introducing a new Article 19 that clarifies the conditions under which individuals can take defensive actions against unlawful infringements without facing penalties [1][2]. Summary by Sections Article 19 Introduction - The new Article 19 states that actions taken to prevent ongoing unlawful infringements that result in damage are not considered violations of public security management and thus are not punishable. However, if the defensive actions exceed necessary limits and cause significant damage, penalties may apply but should be mitigated [1][3]. Legal Continuity and Philosophy - The addition of Article 19 is seen as a continuation and unification of legal provisions regarding self-defense, reflecting the principle that "the law cannot yield to unlawful acts." This principle asserts that every individual has the right to defend their rights against infringement [2][4]. Social Implications - The revision has garnered attention due to past cases where victims faced penalties for defending themselves, leading to a culture of fear in exercising self-defense. The new law aims to provide a solid legal foundation for citizens to protect their rights within reasonable limits, thereby enhancing social justice awareness [2][3]. Conditions for Self-Defense - Article 19 includes conditions that encourage self-defense while also cautioning against excessive responses. It specifies that if the aggressor has ceased their actions, continued retaliation by the victim would be inappropriate, emphasizing the need for proportionality in self-defense [3][4]. Legislative Purpose - The overarching legislative purpose of the Public Security Administration Punishment Law is to protect the legitimate rights and interests of citizens, organizations, and other entities. The revised Article 19 provides legal grounds for citizens to assert their rights in the face of unlawful actions [4].

Core Viewpoint - The case of a restaurant owner in Zibo, Shandong, who was involved in a mutual fight with a drunken customer, highlights the complexities of self-defense laws in China, emphasizing the need for a clearer understanding and application of the principle that "the law should not yield to unlawful acts" [1][2]. Group 1: Legal Principles - The principle of "the law should not yield to unlawful acts" is well-known but often faces challenges in specific cases, leading to prolonged judicial processes [1]. - The concept of self-defense should apply universally, regardless of the severity of the incident, and individuals should not be expected to rationally assess the appropriate level of response during an unlawful attack [2][3]. Group 2: Judicial Practice - There is an urgent need to activate self-defense provisions in both criminal and administrative law, particularly in common public disturbances that may not involve severe criminal implications [3]. - The handling of minor cases requires enhanced professional competence among law enforcement to avoid simplistic resolutions like "both sides are at fault," ensuring that self-defense claims are properly recognized from the outset [3].