1 Introduction Necessity as a reason for justification falls within the third element of the crime, illegitimacy, in criminal law. The need to rely on the defense of necessity arises when one must choose between suffering an unavoidable harm or danger and breaking the law to avoid such harm and can be used if the defendant, faced with such a dilemma, chooses to break the law and/or cause harm to an innocent third party. Necessity, as a defense against murder, violates the constitutional rights to life and equality, as the right to life is seen as "prior to all other rights in the Constitution". Since, "in the charge of murder, an effective defense of necessity or duress would imply that a life (that of the accused) has more value than that of the deceased", it is here questioned and critically discussed what the legal position is regarding this should be the question. English law provides that one must be a hero and give one's life for that of another, while the position in South African (SA) law is that necessity “may constitute a complete defense to a charge of murder”.2 Necessity as a ground of justification Necessity as a ground of justification will be successful if one acts out of necessity to protect one's (or others') legally recognized interests from an unavoidable danger or evil. This unavoidable danger can take the form of an illegal human act, a natural disaster, or an attack by an animal. There is, therefore, a balance between the threatened interest and the violated interest. Necessity can be used as a defense, making the specific act lawful, in certain circumstances if the act conforms to the needs of the defense being (1) there must be an unavoidable danger that threatens a legal remedy...... means of paper ......f another on top of his. For this defense to be successful, the courts must be satisfied that, in the circumstances, it was necessary to take a life to save one's own. On the other hand, English law unrealistically expects a person in a situation of necessity in the case of murder, in contrast to the position of the SA, to sacrifice his own life to save that of another. A more realistic way in which the law could develop in this regard is to take both positions into account, i.e. that although it is questionable whether an effective defense of murder contradicts the Constitution, it is necessary to consider a realistic response of a person (the accused) in circumstances of necessity. However, rigorous consideration of the circumstances is required when considering the success of the defense and the punishment for the conduct.