This essay analyzes the interpretive continuity between Italian criminal law doctrine and jurisprudence, both national and European, regarding the subjective element of self-defense under Article 52 of the Italian Criminal Code. The study demonstrates how authoritative doctrine advocates for a restrictive interpretation of the provision, requiring the presence of *animus defendendi* as a constitutive element of the justification. This approach finds confirmation in the consolidated jurisprudence of the Court of Cassation, which has progressively valued the subjective element of self-defense, excluding its applicability when the agent acts with intentions other than the protection of the threatened right. The European Court of Human Rights has developed a consistent jurisprudence that, while not explicitly referring to *animus defendendi*, implicitly recognizes its relevance by emphasizing the importance of defensive purpose in the use of force. The Court of Cassation has implemented an *interpretatio abrogans* of the proportionality presumptions introduced by recent legislative reforms, reaffirming the necessity of rigorous verification of all requirements of the justification, including the subjective element. The analysis reveals that, regardless of acceptance of the theory of subjective elements in justifications, the term “costretto” (compelled) in Article 52 introduces a qualified causal nexus between offense and defense that cannot exist in self-defense unknown to the agent. De iure condendo, the essay proposes introducing a specific provision for willful excess in self-defense with attenuated punishment compared to voluntary homicide, and a partial non-punishability clause for cases of grave disturbance of the agent, following the German model, while maintaining civil liability. The restrictive interpretation of Article 52, requiring the presence of *animus defendendi*, emerges as the most coherent reading with the fundamental principles of the Italian legal system and obligations arising from the European Convention on Human Rights.