Take the 2-minute tour ×
History Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for historians and history buffs. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I know that the concept of "citizen's arrest" in USA originated from British common law.

It seems that in a lot of countries listed in Wiki are ones that have the same origin of that law, since they were once ruled by Great Britain in one form or another.

In common law jurisdictions, the practice dates back to medieval Britain and the English common law, in which sheriffs encouraged ordinary citizens to help apprehend law breakers.

Are there other countries where the concept historically originated independently of British Common law? E.g. that have records of the laws of that nature on the books stemming from before they could be obviously imported from British sphere of influence?

There are a couple of countries listed on Wiki that aren't ex-Brit colonies/mandates (Brazil, Portugal, Germany, France), but it only gives present status, not the origins of each country's law.

share|improve this question
    
Would you consider Russian задержание as citizen arrest? –  Anixx Apr 16 at 20:18
    
@Anixx - did regular citizens have the right to задержать someone? The only example I know of was special groups explicitly authorized to patrol by militia (meaning, they were effectively deputized and therefore NOT counting as "citizen" arrest). Russian Wikipedia explicitly notes that "Гражданский арест ... Наиболее известен в странах англосаксонского права, главным образом — в США... и Великобритании). –  DVK Apr 17 at 1:20
    
yes, they have such right, until the arrival of police. –  Anixx Apr 17 at 1:21
    
@Anixx - have as in post-1993 or had before? If before - my main interest was before 1900s to prevent the likelyhood of comtamination from British law ideas - throw a proof reference in and you'll have a good answer. –  DVK Apr 17 at 1:22
    
obviously, before as well. Otherwise how you can stop robbers or aggressive people? –  Anixx Apr 17 at 1:24
show 3 more comments

1 Answer

This is a citation from the Criminal Code of the RussianSFSR of 1960 (original edition, without amendments):

Article 13. Necessary defense

Shall not be considered a crime any act, even having features of doing listed in the Special part of this Code, but conducted in the state of necessary defense that is when protecting interests of the Soviet state, public interest, personality or the rights of the defending or another person from an offense dangerous to the public by causation of damage to the offender, if when doing so there was no commited infringement upon the limits of necessary defense.

Infringement upon the limits of necessary defense shall be considered evident inconsistency of defense to the character and danger of the offense.

Article 14. Extreme necessity

Shall not be considered a crime any act, even having features of doing listed in the Special part of this Code, but conducted in the state of extreme necessity that is for neutralizing of danger threatening the interests of the Soviet state, public interest, personality or the rights of the person or other citizens if this danger under given circunstances could not be neutralized by other means and if the caused damage is less substantial than the prevented damage.

As you can see, these articles are more broad than just arresting somebody. As part of these articles you could catch any person if that would be necessary to prevent any further crimes.

Modern Russian criminal code mentions the right to catch an offender for delivering him to the police explicitely.

share|improve this answer
    
Sorry, I don't think these were meant to include arrest. –  DVK Apr 17 at 2:36
    
@DVK this depends of what you mean under arrest, but it definitely included deprivation of freedom. –  Anixx Apr 17 at 2:37
    
Arrest means you're LEGALLY arrested. As in, you don't have the right to leave if you physically can. –  DVK Apr 17 at 2:39
    
@DVK Well the capturing person definitely can use force to prevent the captured person from leaving. Or do you mean a situation when the captured person would be additionally punished by the court for trying to escape the capturer? –  Anixx Apr 17 at 2:41
1  
The latter. Basically, where you escaping your civilian capturer is equated to escaping real arrest –  DVK Apr 17 at 2:51
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.