Extortion

Legal definiton 

Section 175 of the Criminal Code:

(1) Whoever forces another person by violence, threats of violence, or threats of other serious harm to act, refrain from acting, or endure something shall be punished by imprisonment for six months to four years or a financial penalty.

(2) The perpetrator shall be punished by imprisonment for two to eight years if the act described in paragraph 1 is committed:

a) as a member of an organized group,

b) with at least two other persons,

c) with a weapon,

d) causing substantial damage,

e) against a pregnant woman,

f) against a witness, expert, or interpreter in connection with the performance of their duties, or

g) against another person due to their actual or presumed race, membership in an ethnic group, nationality, political beliefs, religion, or because they are actually or presumed to be without religion.

(3) The perpetrator shall be punished by imprisonment for five to twelve years if the act described in paragraph 1:

a) causes serious bodily harm,

b) is committed with the intent to enable or facilitate the commission of a terrorist criminal offense, the crime of financing terrorism (Section 312d), or the crime of threatening a terrorist offense (Section 312f), or

c) causes large-scale damage.

(4) The perpetrator shall be punished by imprisonment for eight to sixteen years if the act described in paragraph 1 causes death.

(5) Preparation is criminal. 

Subjective aspect - intent

Extortion of personal freedom is an intentional criminal offence. A criminal offence is committed intentionally if the perpetrator wanted to violate or endanger a legally protected interest in the manner specified by the Criminal Code (direct intent), or if the perpetrator knew that his actions could result in such a violation or endangerment and accepted the possibility of it occurring (indirect intent).

If the act can be deemed as mere negligence rather than intent, it does not constitute the described criminal offence. 

Defense

There are various defense strategies available. Given the elements of this crime, the following questions may be relevant:

• How did the perpetrator threaten the aggrieved person?
• Could the aggrieved person perceive the perpetrator's actions as a threat?
• What was the intensity of the threatened harm?
  
• Was the method of threat lawful (e.g., a pre-litigation notice)?
  
• Did the perpetrator act alone, or were other persons present?
  
• Did the incident occur in a public place?
  
• What was the relationship between the perpetrator and the aggrieved person?
• Did the perpetrator pursue a legitimate aim? Was the intent to restore a lawful state, albeit through impermissible self-help (e.g., reclaiming a borrowed item)?
  
• Are there any circumstances excluding unlawfulness present (e.g., self-defense)?
• Was the perpetrator sane at the time of the act? Were they under the influence of alcohol, drugs, or mental illness?
• Was the perpetrator's intent directed towards the decisive facts?