Is It Ok To Take Out Starter Studs After 3 Weeks?

Professional ethics and forensic rhetoric: a contribution of Prof. Manzin

visualizza il contributo del Prof. Manzin , Ordinario di Filosofia del Diritto , Università di Trento: Deontologia e retorica forense

Wedding Usually Cost Montery

Constitutional Court, Case 336, filed October 10, 2008: art. 268 Code of Criminal Procedure, wiretapping and the rights of the defense

REPUBBLICA ITALIANA

IN NOME DEL POPOLO ITALIANO

LA CORTE COSTITUZIONALE

composta dai signori:

- Giovanni Maria    FLICK                                               Presidente

- Francesco AMIRANTE Judge

- Ugo De Siervo "

- Paolo MADDALENA "

- Alfio FINOCCHIARO ”

- Alfonso               QUARANTA                                             ”

- Franco                 GALLO                                                     "

- Luigi MAZZELLA "

- Gaetano SILVESTRI "

- Maria Rita SAULLE "

- Giuseppe thesaurus "

- Paolo Maria NAPOLITANO "

gives the following Judgement

in judging the constitutionality of Article. 268 of the Criminal Procedure Code, sponsored by the Judge for Preliminary Investigations of the Court of Catanzaro, by order of December 22, 2005, registered as No. 570 of 2006 and published in the Register of Orders Official Gazette of the Republic No. 50, Special Series, in the year 2006.

Since the act of incorporation of NP ;

heard the public hearing of September 23, 2008 the Judge Rapporteur Gaetano Silvestri.

The facts

1. - The judge for preliminary investigations of the Court of Catanzaro, by order of December 22, 2005 (received by the Constitutional Court October 30, 2006), has raised - with reference to Arts. 3, 24, second paragraph, and 111, second and third paragraphs of the Constitution - an issue of constitutionality of Article. 268 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to the extent that you do not deposit, or otherwise not available to the suspect and his legal counsel, when requested, records of telephone communications as a basis for a precautionary measure staff already executed, even before the filing procedure set by paragraphs 4 and following of that art. 268 cod. proc. pen.

Judge court is called upon to evaluate a request for withdrawal or replacement of the extent of pre-trial detention ordered against persona accusata dei delitti di associazione di tipo mafioso (art. 416- bis  del codice penale) e usura (art. 644 cod.  pen .).

La misura era stata applicata, alcuni mesi prima, sulla base degli elementi desunti da intercettazioni telefoniche e «ambientali», che il pubblico ministero richiedente aveva sottoposto al giudice della cautela solo per il mezzo di trascrizioni operate dalla polizia giudiziaria. La difesa dell’indagato aveva sollecitato il pubblico ministero a consentire l’ascolto e la riproduzione delle registrazioni originali, contando di dimostrare l’intervenuto travisamento della prova raccolta. Il magistrato inquirente, però, aveva respinto l’istanza, arguing on the continued conduct of preliminary investigations and assuming that the right of defense access to the records could be exercised only after the deposit of documents relating to the interception ("the stage of Subprocedure which will then prevail before the competent court.")

The defense of the suspect was then directed to the referring court, with a question de libertate under which assumes that in this case, transcripts of police used in the reconstruction of the circumstantial would be unreliable, as marked omissions and repeated references to incomprehensible sentences, thus changing the sense of the conversations instigated by the individual.

For this reason, and because the evidence-based care inaccessible for the defense, was primarily sought the withdrawal of the measure being implemented. In the alternative, the defense of the suspect to plead the unconstitutionality of Article. 268 cod. proc. pen. For the alleged conflict with the Articles. 24 and 111 of the Constitution, "in so far as the law does not provide for the transposition of the recordings on magnetic tape used in custodial request and subsequent order of application."

Judge court proceeds on the basis that the pubblico ministero avrebbe negato legittimamente l’accesso della difesa alle registrazioni che documentano le conversazioni intercettate. A partire dal comma 4, l’art. 268 cod. proc.  pen . regola un procedimento che muove dal deposito dei verbali e delle registrazioni, e che subordina il rilascio di copie all’intervenuta celebrazione della cosiddetta udienza di stralcio, limitandolo dunque alle conversazioni indicate dalle parti e ritenute ammissibili dal giudice. La scansione dettata dalla norma, a parere del rimettente, non prevede alcuna deroga per la fase antecedente al deposito, neppure quando le conversazioni intercettate vengano utilizzate, a fini probatori, nell’ambito di un incidente cautelare.

According to the court a quo , the law does not preclude the prosecution service to transmit to the court supervision of the magnetic media or digital reproducing the intercepted communications. However, according to the unanimous line of decisions, the demand for care can also be evaluated and accepted on the basis of informal transcripts, edited by the judicial police. In these cases, the defense would remain free access to the records: in fact these are not included because they were submitted to the court, among the measures to be filed under Article. 293 cod. proc. pen. Immediately after the implementation of the restrictive measure, the deposit pursuant to art. 268 cod. proc. pen., On the other hand, may be postponed until the end of the preliminary investigation, thereby also delaying the exercise of the right of defense access to documents and recordings. In essence, the prosecutor would be allowed to "not settle or otherwise not available to the suspect and his lawyer, who so request, records of conversations form the basis of a personal protective measure." The referring

is reasonable, in front of urgency typical accident supervision and the continuing secrecy of investigations, that the law does not require the filing of wiretapping and to the fulfillment prima dell’uso delle risultanze a fini cautelari. Tuttavia le esigenze descritte vengono meno dopo la contestazione degli elementi indiziari acquisiti, e dunque non possono giustificare la perdurante esclusione della difesa dall’accesso alle registrazioni, specie quando venga negata la corrispondenza fra le trascrizioni redatte dalla polizia giudiziaria ed il contenuto effettivo dei colloqui intercettati.

Il giudice  a quo , con specifico riguardo alla garanzia del diritto di difesa dopo l’esecuzione di un provvedimento cautelare, ricorda come  la Corte  costituzionale abbia dichiarato, con la  sentenza n. 192 del 1997 , l’illegittimità dell’art. 293 cod. proc. pen., In so far did not provide the option for the defender to take copies of documents submitted with the required supervision. As disregarded from documents sent by the prosecutor, the recordings of intercepted conversations would constitute "the real source of evidence" to charge the suspect, and therefore should be accessible to him (even through the issuance of a copy) as additional candidates forming the basis of restriction of liberty. In the present context, the formula of the right to defend themselves in trying "would be rather empty of content, in direct violation of Article. 24 of the Constitution

According to the referring court criticized the discipline infringes the principle of equality between the prosecution and defense, and still be entitled to the suspect being conducted as soon as the conditions necessary to prepare a defense (Article 111 of the Constitution). The

intervened 'publication' of the test after the implementation of the restrictive measure, then, would the parties to the proceedings on terms of substantial equality, which should have equal treatment in the perspective article. 3 of the Constitution and instead, under the current rules, the prosecutor would maintain exclusive access to the source of "primary" test it. The referring

reiterates that the right defensive access not be regarded as guaranteed by paragraph 3 of art. 293 cod. proc. pen. Because the deposit is required only for the file sent with the request for precautionary measures that the prosecutor is not required to integrate with the integration of media recording. Detrimental to the prescription, however, is found in art. 268 of the Code of ritual, because just this rule (omitting the provision of a mechanism for the exposition accident supervision) would preclude access to records, even against a defense request to that effect, until the filing of acts governed by paragraphs 4 and below.

In point of relevance, Judge court notes that the instance de liberty on which the person concerned is required to provide restricted in freedom according to the content of communications, according to the defense of the person concerned would have been misinterpreted due to a transcript summary, incorrect and incomplete.

2. - The suspect in the main proceedings before the court by an application filed December 20, 2006.

After a summary of the procedural scans already illustrated by the court, the memory of the constitution lists a series of communications that the police would be transcribed, and sometimes only a summary, a cursory and incomplete.

According to the private party should provide the required supervision, the case law on the primary value of records as sources of proof, by its magnetic or digital, at least in cases where it can not be promptly complied with the provisions of paragraph 4 of 'Art. 268 cod. proc. pen., Which requires the deposit of materials relating to the interception, unless indeed the possibility of a waiver, within five days of completion of play. In any case, should not be allowed to the prosecution to deny access to records after the execution of the injunction. Such foreclosure thwart the principle of equality between the parties and the right to a hearing of the accused, whose practice requires full knowledge of the sources of evidence similar to that of the accuser.

A "balance" the sacrifice of defensive collateral requirements do not apply to investigative secrecy or confidentiality of persons involved in the interception. The private shows in fact - in line with the findings of the referring court - that the complaint concerns the proposed communication only as a basis of the precautionary measure, therefore, already "revealed" dall'inquirente and already deemed relevant to the proceedings. The recognition of right to copy, on the other hand, does not amount to a permit disclosure of records, the circulation of "outside" would be governed by general rules of acts of the preliminary investigation.

The contested provision would betray the ratio of the aforementioned sentence no 192, 1997, by which the Constitutional Court ruled that the deprivation of freedom determines the need for a full exercise of the right of defense, provided by the "wider and easier understanding of the elements which it is based on public demand ministry. " On the other hand, the autonomy supervision of the accident involves a specific guarantee of the hearing, which could not be restricted on the basis of procedures (those marked by art. 268 cod. proc. pen.) regarding the formation of evidence for the substantive proceedings in its specific hearing screening.

legal considerations

1. - The judge for preliminary investigations of the Court of Catanzaro doubts - as Articles. 3, 24, second paragraph, and 111, second and third paragraphs of the Constitution - the constitutionality of Article. 268 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, in so which can not deposit or otherwise not available to the suspect and his legal counsel, when requested, records of telephone communications as a basis for a precautionary measure staff already done, even before the filing procedure regulated by Sections 4 and following of that art. 268 cod. proc. pen.

2. - The question is based within the limits specified below.

2.1. - Article. 268, paragraph 4, no. proc. pen. requiring the filing in the office of recordings of intercepted communications, together with the decrees and authorization to the minutes of the underlying transactions of listening, within five days after the conclusion of the operations themselves. However, if the deposit can result in a serious injury to the investigation, the court shall authorize the prosecutor to delay no later than the close of the preliminary investigation (paragraph 5). After filing, which allows the defenders to examine documents and hear the conversations, you start to drop during the so-called hearing, during which the court acquires the communications referred by the parties, delete them, even in the office, the communications where it is forbidden to use, it has the full transcript of communications acquired only with the forms and safeguards of the report (paragraph 6).

Paragraph 2 of that Article. 268 cod. proc. pen . consente la formazione dei cosiddetti «brogliacci», costituiti dai verbali nei quali è trascritto, a cura della polizia giudiziaria, anche sommariamente, il contenuto delle comunicazioni intercettate. La trascrizione integrale, nella forma della perizia, è poi disposta dal giudice per essere, infine, inserita nel fascicolo per il dibattimento (comma 7).

Si deve rilevare che, in caso di autorizzazione al ritardo del deposito degli atti concernenti le intercettazioni, la trascrizione non può avere luogo prima che decorra il termine dilatorio accordato dal giudice e che vengano compiuti gli adempimenti prescritti dai commi 6 e seguenti dello stesso art. 268. Solo a questo punto i difensori possono estrarre copia delle transcripts and enforce the implementation of magnetic tape recording (paragraph 8).

2.2. - In case of accident pre-trial if the prosecutor presents to the judge for preliminary investigations required to measure deprivation of liberty, may file in support of that claim, only the "waste books" and not recordings of intercepted communications. In this sense it is oriented to the constant and uniform law review (ex plurimis , the most recent Supreme Court Criminal, Case No. 36439 of 2004, Case No. 39469 of 2004). However, the same Court of legitimacy is also constant and uniform in arrange for the transcript (also the expert) does not constitute direct evidence of a conversation, but it should be regarded as a representative transaction in graphic form the content of evidence obtained by recording audio (formerly plurimis , among the most Recent Criminal Cassation, Judgement No. 4892 of 2003, Case No. 10890 of 2005).

3. - The court, after noting that the rules do not require the prosecutor to the filing of the records nor any obligation to make available to defendants, at their request, questions the constitutionality of Article. 268 cod. proc. pen. because the same not providing the right of defense to have direct knowledge of the communication log form the basis of the request and the subsequent measure restricting personal liberty of the suspect, diminishes the right to defense (Article 24, second paragraph of the Constitution), alters, down the suspect and the equality of parties before the court (Article 111, second paragraph of the Constitution) and does not allow the accused person to have the conditions necessary to prepare his defense (Article 111, third paragraph, Constitution) . The contested provision would also be contrary to the principle of equality of citizens before the law contained in art. 3 of the Constitution.

believes that listening to this Court direct the conversations intercepted communications can not be superseded by more transcriptions, without contradiction, by the judicial police, which may be, for explicit legislative requirements (Article 268, paragraph 2, no. proc. pen.), including summary. It is hardly necessary to observe that direct access to the records may be deemed necessary by the defense of the suspect, to assess the real significance of such evidence. The quality of the recordings may not be perfect, and impose a real work of 'interpretation' of words and phrases recorded, especially if the conversations are used dialects or foreign languages. In any case, are often relevant to the intonations of the voice, the pauses, which, for the same transcription of phonemes, may change all or part of the meaning of a conversation. There is no doubt that the transcription of the talks is an expert mode of assessment of the evidence more reliable than it is in fact the police operator and, a fortiori, the synthesis that may be contained in the "waste books". The expert is an expert, with specific equipment, and operates between the parties, possibly through consultants. The same provides a literal transcription, but also additional information when needed (intonation of voice, length of pause etc.), which may affect the meaning of a communication. The transcript also may contain components expert interpretation, but is guaranteed by the strangeness of its author in the investigation and hearing.

is clear that in the absence of the transcript made by the expert, the interest on direct defensive pins, each time in which the defense believes it should check the authenticity of the transcripts made by the police and used by the public prosecutor for court to make its demands. This is precisely the subject of the case law of this case. The possibility for the prosecutor to deposit only "waste books" to support a request for custody of the suspect, if justified by the need to proceed without delay to safeguard the objectives that the Code of ritual allocated to the measure, can not limit the right of defense direct access to the test in order to assess the probative value of the elements that led the prosecutor to ask the judge to issue and a measure restricting personal freedom.

should be added that, if the demand and application of personal protective measures - such as the subject of court proceedings - with confidentiality requirements for further investigation and possible reasons of confidentiality are totally failed in relation to communications form the basis of the restrictive measure, the content of which was revealed following the presentation by the prosecutor, in support of the request, transcripts made by the judicial police.

The lesion of the right guaranteed by the defense. 24, second paragraph of the Constitution is thus presented in its entirety, since the restriction on access to records is not balanced by any other interest recognized by the law of the case. Also affected must be considered the principle of equality of parties before the court under Article. 111, second paragraph of the Constitution.

4. - Full protection right of defense and the principle of equality of the parties in the process requires a decision of acceptance of this Court, limited to the absence of provision in art. 268 cod. proc. pen., Defenders of the right of direct access to the records, getting the transposition on magnetic tape.

The larger solution proposed by the court, referring to a filing process after execution of the enforcement action, it is not necessary in the particular context at issue here, for the guarantee of the interest protected by Article defensive. 24, second paragraph of the Constitution, and therefore can not be accepted. A prediction of filing specifically refers supervision incident, and asked only to communications to the subject of the request, would result in a new procedural rule and in many ways unusual, starting with the fact that performance relates to acts which are not presented to the court, and would be supervised by a person other than the court itself, which provides directly, according to the provisions of paragraph 3 of art. 293 cod. proc. pen., To file documents on which it based its decision.

constitutionally protected interest of the defense is to know the records at the base of the measure carried out in order to effectively bring all remedies under the rules of procedure. In the case that such records are not included among the documents sent with the request order, the self-defense claim of access to direct evidence of intercepted communications is not satisfied by the right of access to the documents filed at the Court, according to the third paragraph of art. 293 cod. proc. pen. After the implementation of the restrictive measure. Hence the interest in question can be provided by the forecast - also proposed by referring to the alternative - the defenders of the right to access records in the possession of the prosecutor.

This right should be reflected by the possibility of obtaining a copy of the audio track, according to the principle already stated by this Court in its Judgement No 192, 1997, regarding the applications lodged at the court after the service or execution supervision order.

The absence of a legislative provision to that effect is due to unconstitutionality of the contested provision. Neither would be sufficient to ensure full compliance with art. 24, second paragraph of the Constitution, recourse to Article. 116 cod. proc. pen., Which governs the release of copies of pleadings. That provision in fact, considered together with art. 43 of the implementing provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, not attributes - as the Court's legitimacy - an unconditional right to the party concerned to obtain copies of the documents, but only a mere possibility, since the request pursuant to paragraph 2 of that article shall be assessed by the court. This forecast does not make sense if it had a right to release the full copy. Confirmation of this interpretation is taken from the cited art. 43 disp. att. cod. proc. pen. Which, by providing that the authorization of the court is not required in cases where the applicant has expressly recognized the right to receive the copy, implicitly rejected the possibility that there is a general and unconditional right to obtain a copy of the pleadings (in this sense the Joint Sections of the Court of Cassation, Judgement No. 4 of 1995).

the face of this jurisprudence is necessary to state clearly that in this case the legislation at issue in these proceedings, referring to the protection of the right of defense in regard to a measure restricting personal liberty has already been executed, the defenders should have the right unconditional access, upon their request, the records form the basis of the request of the prosecutor and not submitted in support of the latter, since replaced by the transcripts, including summary executions, carried out by the police. The right

access implies, as a natural consequence, to achieve the transposition on magnetic tape recordings themselves.

for these reasons

THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT

declares the constitutional illegitimacy of article. 268 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, in so far does not provide that, after notification or enforcement of the ordinance provides for a precautionary measure staff, the defender can get transposed onto magnetic tape recordings of conversations or communications intercepted, used to for the adoption of protective measure, even though not filed.

Così deciso in Roma, nella sede della Corte costituzionale, Palazzo della Consulta,  l'8 ottobre 2008.

F.to:

Giovanni Maria FLICK, Presidente

Gaetano SILVESTRI , Redattore

Gabriella MELATTI , Cancelliere

Depositata in  Cancelleria  il 10 ottobre 2008.

 

Micro Sd Card Reseter

Cass. pen. Sec. United (ud. 10/07/2008) 09/23/2008 No 36527

Cass. pen. Sez. Unite, (ud. 10-07-2008) 23-09-2008, n. 36527

"E' applicabile l'indulto (di cui, nella specie, alla L. 31 luglio 2006, n. 241) alle persone condannate all'estero e trasferite in Italia per l'espiazione della pena con la procedura stabilita dalla Convenzione di Strasburgo del 21 marzo 1983 sul trasferimento della persone ordered, ratified and implemented in Italy by Law July 25, 1988, No 334.

Conduct of case 1. - By decision of 07.19.1999, the Court of Appeal of Milan, under the Strasbourg Convention of 21 March 1983 on the Transfer of Sentenced Persons and the effects of 'execution of the sentence in Italy, acknowledged the decision of the Crown Court in Strafford 06.15.1989 (UK), in which NOS was sentenced to life imprisonment for murder, resulting in thirty years' imprisonment, the sentence to be executed in the Italian State.

By order of the Court itself declared unenforceable 31/5/2007 at No. pardons under Law No. 241 of 2006 richiamando l'orientamento della giurisprudenza di legittimità che aveva costantemente escluso l'applicabilità dell'indulto alle persone condannate all'estero e trasferite in Italia per l'espiazione della pena ai sensi della citata Convenzione, sul duplice assunto che lo Stato di esecuzione è vincolato alla natura e alla durata della sanzione stabilite dallo Stato di condanna e che la modifica della durata della pena in senso favorevole al condannato è ipotesi eccezionale, prevista dall'art. 12 della Convenzione solo per effetto di "grazia, amnistia e commutazione della pena", ma non di indulto, istituto ivi non contemplato e l diverso dalla commutazione della pena.

2. - Avverso detta ordinanza ha proposto ricorso per cassazione N., who called for its cancellation denouncing the violation of art. 606 cpp, Lett. b)-c)-c) in relation to Articles. 174 Criminal Code, Art. 9, 12 and 14 of the Convention of Strasbourg of March 21, 1983, Art. 672 Code of Criminal Procedure and the Law No 241, 2006.

supports the applicant, even with the next defense is that the expression "commutation of the sentence" referred to in art. 12 are to include a pardon, an institution that has no equivalent in Anglo-Saxon terminology nor in French, if it is always manifested the desire to facilitate the enforcement stage of the foreign court the application of the generality of the benefits they have to effect the reduction of sentence and that are established by legislation both substantive and procedural law of the State condemning both the State in which the sentenced person is transferred in the art. 9 entrusted the responsibility of enforcement.

interpretation differ from that claimed, according to the applicant, would expose the law ratifying the Convention to doubt the constitutionality of subjecting the person sentenced abroad in Italy and transferred to an unreasonably inferior treatment compared to the person judged and condemned in Italy.

3. - The first section, felt obliged to share the solution to the constant address different interpretations of legitimacy, which motivates the inapplicability of the pardon to the convicted person and transferred abroad in Italy with regard to the wording and the exceptional nature of Article. 12 of the Convention on the ground that it in fact, means by the term "pardon, amnesty and commutation of the sentence" any institution in the corresponding individual legal exercise of a power of clemency, either alone or generalized, by order of 12 / 3 - 22/5/2008, there is a situation of potential conflict of case law, referred the decision to the United Sections, to which the appeal was assigned by the first President for today's hearing in closed session.

The Attorney General at the Court, agreeing with the applicant's argument and pointing out the chief objectives of the Convention give input during the execution of the sentence in any more favorable treatment to the offender, amended the earlier conclusions and has asked the court to set aside the order under appeal. Reasons for Decision


1. - The joint sections are called upon to answer the question "whether it should apply the pardon (which, in this case, the L. July 31, 2006, No. 241) and transfer of sentenced persons abroad in Italy for the expiation of pain with the procedure established by the Strasbourg Convention of 21 March 1983 on the Transfer of Sentenced Persons, ratified and implemented in Italy by Law 25 July 1988, n. 334.

The question of law the Supreme Court has long expressed interpretative guidance unique in the sense that, under Articles. 9:12 of the Convention on the Transfer of Sentenced Persons, the benefit is not applicable in favor of the pardon of the convicted person held in Italy and abroad (Cass., Sec. 1 ^, January 29, 2008 No 10266, Nogarin; Sez . 1 ^, 20 December 2007 No 2106, PG proc. Falcone, Sec. 1 ^, 5 December 2007 No. 47 005, Lenses, Sec. 1 ^, 31 October 2007 No 42 420, Now, rv. 237,971; Sez . 1 ^, 25 October 2007 No 40804, PG in proc. Perino, Sec. 1 ^, 11 April 2007 No 19444, Greek, Sec. 6 ^, March 21, 2007 No 17804, Melina, rv. 236,583; Sez . No 19,076 1.14 March 2007, PG in proc. Poma, rv.

238,434, Sec. 1 ^, 23 January 2007 No 17583, Cutrona, RV. 236510, Sec. 4th, December 14, 2000, Di Cesare, RV. 217967, Sec. 1st, February 28, 1997, Giacomazzi, RV. 207188, Sec. 6th, October 7th, 1994, PG in proc. Falci, RV. 199937, Sec. 1st, June 22, 1994, Pileggi, RV. 198,914).

The reasons given in support of the now-established hermeneutic solution can be briefly identified: a) in the bond under Article. 10 of the Convention for the State of enforcement, which should, in principle, conform to the legal nature and duration of the penalty as imposed by the sentencing State; b) entry in order to conclude from the literal fact that Article . 12 of the Convention authorizes the State to implement the change in the length of the sentence in favor of the condemned only in cases of pardon and amnesty or commutation of the sentence, without including the other institution of the pardon, c) unable to assimilate the pardon provided for in institutions 'Art. 12, each with a precise technical meaning and legal d) in exceptional and narrow interpretation of the provision contained in art. 12, therefore not susceptible of interpretation by analogy or extensive.

is added, in one of the most recent elaboration of the theme (Section 1 ^, No. 42420/07, now, cit.), The lemma "switching" has a precise technical meaning into domestic law:

l'art. 174 c.p., stabilisce che "l'indulto ... condona in tutto o in parte la pena inflitta, ovvero la commuta in una altra specie di pena stabilita dalla legge", con l'effetto alternativo di estinguere, in tutto o in parte, la pena (condono), ovvero di trasformarla in un'altra sanzione meno afflittiva prevista dalla legge (commutazione); sicchè l'art. 12 della Convenzione farebbe riferimento solo a una delle due forme dell'indulto, la commutazione della pena, ma non anche al condono, istituto questo peculiare del nostro ordinamento e non comune alla generalità degli ordinamenti degli Stati firmatari della Convenzione.

2. - E però, deve darsi atto che la linea interpretativa stabilmente seguita dalla Court of Cassation is much criticized by the doctrine and has not met with unanimous Court on the merits, not lacking in that decision (App. Caltanissetta, 05.09.2002, 30 ^; App Rome, 21/9/2006 , B. App and Catanzaro, 1/12/2006, Vizza, in Foro It., 2007, 2 ^, 60), in open and informed dissent from the Court's legitimacy, said positions in favor of the pardon application transferred to the condemned in Italy for the expiation of punishment imposed abroad. Sections

United, like a careful assessment of the reasons given in support of either argument, meditate properly with regard to the comments and criticisms della Sezione rimettente sia del Procuratore Generale, ritengono che l'indirizzo, pur costantemente enunciato finora dalla giurisprudenza di legittimità, non possa essere condiviso e che l'opposta soluzione sia sorretta da argomenti maggiormente affidabili sul piano logico e sistematico.

3. - Mette conto preliminarmente di sottolineare che il metodo interpretativo da adottare per l'esatta ricostruzione del contenuto delle norme della Convenzione di Strasburgo del 21 marzo 1983 sul trasferimento delle persone condannate deve ispirarsi alle direttive contenute nella Convenzione di Vienna sul diritto dei trattati, stipulata il 23 maggio 1969, ratificata e resa esecutiva in Italia con L. 12 febbraio 1974, n. 112, che stabilisce criteri ermeneutici non similar to those used for the interpretation of provisions of Procedure.

With particular regard to the provisions contained in Article. 31 (General rule of interpretation "), art. 32 (" Supplementary means of interpretation ") and Art. 33 (" Interpretation of treaties authenticated in two or more languages) of section 3 of Part 3 ^ of the Convention, on " interpretation of treaties ", note the following criteria: any expression of a treaty must be interpreted in" good faith "is presumed, unless otherwise simple intention of the parties, that the objective meaning of a given period coincides with the" ordinary meaning "the same;

this must be sought in the "context" and in the light of the 'goal' and 'object' of the Treaty, the "context" includes, in addition to the text, the preamble and any other agreement or instrument to it equated between the parties, such as Explanatory Report;

supplementary means of interpretation are allowed to obtain confirmation or clarification of the meaning resulting from the hermeneutic conducted on the basis of the main criteria.

peacefully is also considered as constituting a general rule of treaty interpretation, implicitly included in the anus. 31 par. 1, the principle ut res magis quam valent Pereat, depending on which of several meanings to a particular expression, it must preference to those which allow the rule to produce an effect, rather than making it unnecessary, and adds that all the principles listed should be considered as a whole, can not be regarded as complete an interpretation that excludes one of them, having everyone together, help to determine the exact meaning of a single provision.

4. - The Strasbourg Convention on the Transfer of Sentenced Persons, adopted March 21, 1983, was submitted for parliamentary ratification was ongoing to examine the government bill "effects of foreign criminal judgments and enforcement of foreign criminal judgments Italian "presented in the 9 th Legislature (S/1741), reintroduced in the next Legislature (S/774) and then abandoned the outcome of the ratification of the Convention and to secure the approval of the new code of ritual. It should be noted, though it may be relevant to the historical reconstruction of the problem of interpretation at issue, which is included in the bill, among other districts, 20 that "are governed by Italian law the extinction of penalties resulting from the recognition the foreign decision and the granting of grace, amnesty and the pardon. "

The Strasbourg Convention is an instrument developed by the Council of Europe in order (expressed both in the Preamble and in the Explanatory Report) to facilitate the transfer to the State citizenship of persons convicted abroad by means of a simple, fast and flexible.

cooperation, in a uniform framework that subject to individual agreements between Member States in a simplified form in turn affected the decision on the transfer of enforcement, is directed to the proper administration of justice and social reintegration and rehabilitation of convicted in the social environment of origin (purpose, this, that the Explanatory Report, para. 23, defines "primary purpose" of the Convention), noting that the repatriation of prisoners in the State of nationality, conditional on the consent of the prisoner and justified for humanitarian reasons (difficulty comunicazione, alienazione dalla cultura e dalle tradizioni locali, assenza di contatti con i familiari), deve comunque costituire "the best interest of the prisoners as well as of the governments" (Rapporto esplicativo, par. 9).

Una volta raggiunto tra gli Stati interessati l'accordo per il trasferimento della persona condannata, l'art. 9 della Convenzione indica due, alternativi, meccanismi opzionali di riconoscimento della sentenza ai fini dell'esecuzione: la continuazione (art. 10) o la conversione della pena (art. 11).

Lo Stato di esecuzione, mentre con la prima procedura prosegue idealmente l'esecuzione della condanna già iniziata presso lo Stato che l'ha pronunciata, pur con taluni possibili adattamenti, con la seconda procedura di riconoscimento ("ex equatur") sostituisce il titolo esecutivo originario con una propria decisione, senza entrare nel merito dei fatti accertati, così che l'esecuzione non è più basata direttamente sulla sentenza dello Stato di condanna.

Nella L. 25 luglio 1988, n. 334, di ratifica ed esecuzione della Convenzione è stato indicato (art. 3) nella "continuazione" il meccanismo scelto dall'Italia, mentre la L. 3 luglio 1989, n. 257, recante, tra l'altro, norme di attuazione della Convenzione sul trasferimento delle persone condannate, stabilisce che neldeterminare la pena la corte d'appello applica i criteri previsti nell'art. 10 della Convenzione (art. 3, comma 2) e che tale corte is equivalent, to all intents and purposes, the judge who pronounced sentence in ordinary criminal proceedings (Article 4, paragraph 1):

measures, they, who are then integrated with the art. Cpp 738, paragraph 1 and to which "... the penalties resulting from the recognition are carried out according to Italian law." 4.1. - Whatever the option chosen, the execution of the sentence is governed by state law enforcement (art. 9. Par. 3):

reference which is to be interpreted "in a wide sense" au sense large ", so to understand "for example, the rules for eligibility for parole, since it must be clear that the Directive requires that" the State Administering Alone Shall Be Competent to take all appropriate Decisions "(Explanatory Report, para. 47).

Article. 10 to turn down, as to the mechanism of continuation, that the State shall be bound to the legal nature and term of the sentence as determined by the sentencing State. It implies "that the sentence be carried out, subject to any subsequent decision of the executing State, for example on conditional release or reduction of the sentence" remission "remise de peine"), corresponds the amount of the original sentence, taking into account the period already suffered and any reduction gained in the sentencing State before the transfer "(Explanatory Report, para. 49). Expectations the differences between the penal systems of the States Parties, the Convention also allows those who opt for the continuation of "adapt" the sentence ("merely to sanction the ADAPT"), provided it meets certain limits: the punishment should fit well, possibly , correspond to the tax, not having in any case be more severe in nature or duration, and must not exceed the prescribed maximum penalty prescribed by law for the same conduct by the State of execution (Explanatory Report, para.

50). Orca

the relationship between the rule laid down by art. 9, par. And the constraint imposed by Article 3. 10 for executing State to respect the amount of the penalty imposed by the sentencing State, this Court has repeatedly stated that if it complied with "the sentence" in the adaptation of the sentence to prison and the treatment modalities for measures relating to it at the stage must, however, apply the legislation of the State of execution (Cass ., Sec. 1 ^, March 30, 1999, Di Carlo, rv.

213,490 and Sec. 6th, October 7th, 2003 No 42996, Mazzucchetti, rv. 228 190, in terms of early release and, respectively, in custody test). The only prohibition concerns the applicability of a measure more serious nature or duration of the sanction imposed in the sentencing State, while there is no prohibition to impose a sentence in a less severe than that of the State condemning (Cass., Sec. 6th, January 13th, 1999 No 180, PG in proc. Van Dijck, rv. 212568).

The scope of the rule set out in Article. 9, par. 3 of the Convention may also be noted the Report to the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe Recommendation 1527 (2001) of 27 June 2001, approved January 23, 2003 (doc. CM / AS (2003) Rec 1527 final, Annex, paragraph 9 , iii), with whom he called upon the Committee:

to clarify that the Convention is not designated to be used for the immediate release of the convicted person once repatriated, to request the Contracting States not to refuse the transfer to because of the possibility of the offender to benefit from early release in the executing State;

to specify the minimum sentence that must be served (for example, 50%), under which states may legitimately refuse the transfer, but above which should facilitate it.

the basis of this recommendation, there was, among other things, the Report of the Committee on Legal and Human Rights of the Council of Europe on June 7, 2001 (Doc. No. 9117 of 07.06.2001 "Operation of the Council of Europe. Convention on the Transfer of Sentenced Persons - critical analysis and recomendations, part 2, p. D, par. 24 et seq.), which illustrate the problems related to differences in the way of execution of the sentence under the laws of the States concerned, rilevava che il meccanismo della Convenzione comporta, sulla base dell'art. 9 par. 3, che la pena da scontare possa essere ridotta rispetto a quella imposta in origine: ciò in quanto l'esecuzione è governativa dalla legge dello Stato che accoglie la persona trasferita, che è l'unico competente ad adottare tutte le decisioni "on remission of sentence, parole, early release etc.", determinando un trattamento più clemente e la liberazione anticipata del condannato.

4.2. - L'art. 12 della Convenzione prevede che ogni Parte può accordare "pardon, amnesty or commutation of the sentencs" - "la gace, l'amnistie ou la commutation de la peine", conformemente alla Costituzione e alle proprie leggi. Il Rapporto esplicativo, par. 59, chiarisce che, benchè lo Stato di esecuzione sia l'unico responsabile per l'esecuzione della pena, "inclusa ogni decisione correlata (ad esempio, la decisione di sospendere l'esecuzione)", i relativi provvedimenti possono essere accordati anche dallo Stato di condanna, sicchè la norma costituisce un'eccezione alla regola stabilita dall'art. 9, par. 3 della Convenzione.

Sull'ampiezza del potere attribuito ad entrambi gli Stati dall'art. 12, mentre l'Italia non ha espresso alcuna riserva, hanno avanzato dichiarazioni procedurali soltanto l'Azerbaijan, per cui le decisioni riguardanti l'applicazione di "pardons and amnestoes" in relazione a sentenze pronunciate in tale Stato dovranno essere concordate con the competent authorities, and Germany, which has reserved the right to transfer a convict only if, on the basis of a statement made on a case by case basis or in general by the State of enforcement, "pardon" will be granted the latter ' last only in agreement with the competent German authorities.

Article. 14 of the Convention provides that the State should stop implementing the execution of the sentence when the sentencing State has informed of any measure that will cut off the enforceability of the same, such as those referred to in art. 12 (Explanatory Report, para. 63).

In any case, the executing State shall inform the sentencing State on execution status (Article 15), particularly when it considers enforcement of the sentence ended, or if it is "served sentence, remission, conditional release, pardon, amnesty, commutation" - "condamnatio purgeè, remise, conditionelle liberation, grace, amnesty, commutation (Explanatory Report, para. 64).

4.3. - In order to improve cooperation arrangements contained in the Strasbourg Convention of 1983, the program of measures to implement the principle of mutual recognition in criminal matters between the European Union countries, was drawn to the proposal - not yet formally approved (for the most recent text see doc. No 5602/08 of 21 April 2008 - COPEN 12) - framework decision "on the application of the principle of mutual recognition to judgments in criminal matters imposing custodial sentences or measures involving deprivation of liberty for the purpose of their enforcement in the European Union (EU Council Doc No . 5597/05 of 24.01.2005). In it certain explicit rules already contained in those agreements, such as enforcement of the sentence in accordance with the laws of the State of execution (Article 17), noting that the authorities of the executing State alone shall be competent to decide on the "mode of execution and to determine all the measures relating thereto, including the early release or parole. When required, sentencing State may obtain information regarding the relevant provisions for early release or probation, to revoke the transfer request. On the measures of clemency, art. 19 confirms that "an amnesty or pardon may be granted by the issuing State and the State of enforcement."

Identical provisions are contained in the Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA, approved February 24, 2005 and on the application of the principle of mutual recognition of financial penalties in relation to which the L. February 25, 2008, No 34 (Community Act 2007) shall bear the delegation to the Government for the adoption of legislative implementation of the decree, in the sense of 'predict that any amnesty or pardon may be granted by the State for a decision by the Italian State "(Article 32, read. m).

4.4. - The regulatory framework regarding the transfer of sentenced persons to be integrated Finally, with the recall of certain provisions contained in bilateral treaties signed by Italy.

In cooperation treaty for the enforcement of criminal judgments with Thailand on 28 February 1984, ratified by Law 27 July 1988, No. 369, states that the receiving State may apply its own laws and procedures governing the manner of execution of imprisonment or other forms of restriction of liberty, probation and "words" as well as those that regulate the "reduction of terms of imprisonment" because of actions of "words", or conditional release of "other" type of measure (or Com "). It also provides that it "also" to the State transferring the power to pardon the offender or commute his sentence.

In the treaty with Peru on 24 November 1994, ratified by Law March 24, 1999, No 90, provides in Article. 10 that the Transferring State reserves the right to pardon or grant amnesty or pardon to the offender and the sentence of the person transferred shall be carried out in accordance with the rules of the penitentiary system of the recipient, including benefits contemplati dalla sua legislazione e quelli concessi dallo Stato trasferente.

Nel trattato con Hong Kong del 18 dicembre 1999, ratificato con L. 11 luglio 2002, n. 149, si stabilisce all'art. 6 che si applicano le leggi e le procedure dello Stato di esecuzione in ordine alla riduzione del periodo di reclusione, ai provvedimenti di "parole", remissione, commutazione, liberazione condizionale ed "altro".

Nel trattato per l'esecuzione delle sentenze penali tra Italia e Cuba del 9 giugno 1998, ratificato con L. 18 luglio 2000, n. 207, si prevede all'art. 12 che "ognuno degli Stati potrà concedere grazia, amnistia o indulto alla persona condannata, in conformità alle sue leggi, comunicandolo immediatamente all'altro Stato". 5. - Tanto premesso, le Sezioni Unite ritengono, in primo luogo, che il dato letterale che fa leva sull'omessa menzione dell'indulto nel testo dell'art. 12 della Convenzione di Strasburgo del 1983 non assuma decisivo rilievo ermeneutico, atteso che: - la Convenzione è redatta nelle due lingue ufficiali del Consiglio di Europa; - la traduzione in lingua italiana non è ufficiale; - l'"indulto" - "condono", totale o parziale, della pena ai sensi dell'art. 174 c.p., comma 1 (diverso dall'indulto meramente commutativo, pure unitariamente delineato nella medesima norma), a differenza della grazia, dell'amnistia e della commutazione della pena, corrisponde ad un istituto ignoto ovvero definito in termini non analoghi negli laws of other States Parties, in particular the United Kingdom and France.

The Explanatory Report makes clear, in fact, that is within the powers of the state of implementation of any decision to "remission of the penalty" - the remise de peine "(par. 49 and 64) and it is interesting to note that this expression has been translated the notion of "amnesty" in some EU documents drawn up in Italian (official language), for example, in the proposal for a Council Decision establishing the European information system on the System (ECRIS: doc. No. COM ( 2008) 332 of 27 May 2008), including the common parameters of accidents on the sentencing measures subject to registration, is provided in versione italiana, l'indulto (remission of the penalty" - "remise de peine"), oltre alla grazia e all'amnistia.

Del pari, l'indulto previsto dalla legge italiana è identificato nella "remise de peine" dalla giurisprudenza della Corte europea dei diritti dell'uomo (Cedu, 13 maggio 1980, Artico c. Italia, par. 45;

Cedu, 10 luglio 2003, Grava c. Italia, par. 31 ss.; Cedu, 2 marzo 2006, Pilla c. Italia, par. 19), come in altri documenti di fonte internazionale.

Definisce "remise de peine" (d'origine parlamentaire) l'indulto secondo la legge italiana uno studio comparativo condotto dal Senato francese nel 2007 sugli istituti demenziali previsti in taluni Stati europei (Les documents de travail du Senat, series Legislation Comparée, amnesty et la grace, doc. LC 177, October 1, 2007), noting that in Italy and Portugal are expected to form part of the remises de Parliament, similar to the "collective grace" (pardon coltective), which is traditionally granted by the President of the Republic on the occasion of the French national holiday involves a "remise de peine partiell" for those detained or sentenced to be calculated on the sentence to be served, according to that study, also in Belgium and the Netherlands have been used by a collective, granted by the King and the French Court of Cassation (Cour de Cassation, Chambre Criminelle, March 10, 1998, No. 97-81151), in relation to the transfer of a sentenced the United Kingdom, argued that, according to the ARA. 9, par. 3, and 10, par. 1 of the Convention of Strasbourg, the remaining sentence to be served will apply French law, excluding, however, in this case, but soloratione temporis, the application of a "remise de peine du Décret de grace Resultant collective" issued prior to the transfer of the convicted in France .

In particular, about the figure of the "collective pardon", the documents of the Council of Europe that this institution, distinguished by the amnesty, is expected not only in Italy (as defined in the pardon under Law No. 241 of 2006) in Austria, Armenia, Belgium, France, Moldova, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Macedonia.

I "collective pardon", sono presi in considerazione nell'Appendice par. 23 alla Raccomandazione R(99)22 adottata il 30 settembre 1999 dal Comitato dei Ministri del Consiglio d'Europa, riguardante il sovrapopolamento delle carceri, che, nell'incoraggiare lo sviluppo di misure per ridurre la durata delle pene da scontare, indica la preferenza per misure individuali come il provvedimento di parole, rispetto a misure collettive per lo svuotamento delle carceri (amnesties, collective pardons).

L'eterogeneità degli istituti di clemenza previsti dalle legislazioni dei Paesi europei è stata rilevata, d'altra parte, sia dalla Commissione europea nel Libro verde sull'avvicinamento, il reciproco riconoscimento e l'esecuzione delle criminal sanctions in the European Union (doc. No. COM (2004) 334 of 30 April 2004, para.

3.1.8., p. 36.), that "the laws of Member States differ on amnesty and pardon significantly, both the Attorney General of the Court of Justice of the CEC in the Opinion on 8 April 2008 in Case 297/07 G (Part D, para. 80), concerning the question of the principle of ne bis in idem failure to execute the sentence due to "amnesty." By this term, said the Attorney General, is defined in a broad sense, "any measure of pardon or remission of punishment, including grace" (translated in Italian "pardon" from the original text in English), which is characterized by individuality, unlike other measures of clemency addressed to a group of people, without however altering the common effect of extinctive right to punish "in all states.

It 'also important to note that Portugal, which has a similar institution of clemency all'indulto (so-called parliamentary pardon or general) provided in the law on international judicial cooperation in criminal matters (L. 31 August 1999, No 144 et seq. modd., art. 101) that in case of transfer of enforcement in Portugal, amnesty, the "perdao generic" and pardon may be granted by both states.

Ultimately, it is clear comparativistic the survey clearly not perfect overlap of the institutes of amnesty and pardon, covering their knowledge in diverse situations all different countries, so that the mere textual data, which relies on the failure to mention the indult art. 12 of the Convention, it does not have a real impact hermeneutics to the outcome of the legal question at issue.

The systematic reconstruction of the true scope of the framework is rather to be entrusted to the most solid hermeneutical criteria established by the "equivalence of legal institutions" and the "ratio" of the rules laid down by the Convention, in view of rationality and the organic system based on supranational and multilateral sources and in accordance with the method of interpretation can be deduced by the directives of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties 6. - On the other hand, the contrary view of the pardon application is not supported even by the alleged exceptional and narrow interpretation of the provision in art. 12 of the Convention, since the legal regime of enforcement for the prisoners transferred to Italy is designed along the lines of principle laid down by art. 9, par. 3 that "the execution of the sentence is governed by the law of the executing State and that State has sole competence to take all appropriate measures in this regard and the procedures under which execution of the sentence must conform to the fundamental principles of the Italian State.

that the discipline of Articles. 9 and 10 of the Convention is without prejudice to the law of the executing State, its principles and its constitutional rules has been categorically stated by the Constitutional Court (Corte cost., Sent. No. 73 of 2001), which called for rule, in the matter of transfer from the United States of an Italian citizen BS on the constitutionality of Law July 25, 1988, No 334, Art. 2, in that, in applying the 1983 Convention, would depart by the conclusion of the transfer agreements, the implementation of institutions to protect of fundamental human rights, thus rebuilding the array and the spirit of the Strasbourg Convention: a) the sentencing State may potestative pay or withhold consent to the transfer of the offender, if he considers that the legal regime for enforcement in the country's potential execution, respectively, whether or not substantially equivalent to that provided by its legal system and, because it can make its own determinations with knowledge of the facts, be informed about the character of this regime in the executing State; b) the executing State in turn, must maintain the legal nature and duration of the penalty, what is provided in the State system of sentencing, "but non al di là del limite superato il quale si determinerebbe una rottura del proprio ordinamento", essendo possibile per evitare tale conseguenza, in caso di disomogeneità degli ordinamenti, operare l'adattamento che la salvaguardia dei principi fondamentali di quello interno, in particolare le sue regole costituzionali, rende strettamente necessario; c) è chiaramente esclusa, tuttavia, "l'eventualità che il soggetto trasferito sia sottoposto a un vero e proprio regime di esecuzione speciale e personale, concernente i diritti, oltre che i doveri, che lo riguardano come detenuto".

Va segnalato al riguardo che alla B. è stato applicato l'indulto ex L. n. 241 del 2006 dalla Corte d'appello di Roma, con ordinanza irrevocabile del 21/9/2006, cit., e che il Ministero della Giustizia, sulla richiesta di collaborazione avanzata in un caso analogo dalla Corte d'appello di Caltanissetta, aveva già espresso l'avviso, con nota del 4 dicembre 2001, che la mancata indicazione dell'indulto all'interno della norma dell'art. 12 della Convenzione si giustifica, secondo gli uffici ministeriali, con il fatto che non è previsto, nelle legislazioni dei Paesi aderenti alla Convenzione di Strasburgo, un istituto che produca gli stessi effetti nè si rinviene, sul piano della terminologia francese e anglosassone, un'espressione equivalente, non potendosi escludere che nel termine "commutazione" vada ricompreso anche l'indulto, in quanto "appare logicamente undeniable that the longer contain the least ".

The thesis supports the exclusion of the exhaustive nature of the guidelines laid down by Article. 12, due to the simplification of formulas, including necessarily equivalent institutions in a multilateral context, is, on the other hand, decisive support in the numerous, precise and unambiguous indications of the Explanatory Report.

Indeed - in the par. 47, stated that the criterion for the execution of the sentence is governed by state law enforcement, it is stated that the reference to that law should be interpreted broadly, so as to include, for example, "conditional release, a measure also not listed in Art. 12 of the Convention, - par. 59 warns that the only recognition in the State of enforcement responsibility for the implementation of the sentence is understood, for example, the right to have them suspended, - par. 64, with reference to Article. 15 of the Convention relating to the information on death penalty, a list of various causes of the cessation of enforcement (for example, "served their sentences, the same remission, parole, pardon, amnesty, commutation) some of which are certainly not attributable to individual institutions mentioned in Article. 12. 7. - At the end of the previous surveys believe the United Sections of exegesis that is not responsive to corretta interpretazione dell'art. 12, nè tantomeno allo spirito e alle finalità della Convenzione di Strasburgo, la tesi che esclude l'applicazione dell'indulto in base alla pretesa natura eccezionale e tassativa della disciplina ivi contenuta.

Puntuali e decisivi argomenti logici e sistematici militano, per contro, a favore della tesi che - in contrasto con la soluzione accolta dalla pur costante giurisprudenza di legittimità - interpreta il citato art. 12 nel senso che gli Stati contraenti hanno fatto riferimento alla grazia, all'amnistia e alla commutazione della pena non con l'intento di limitare i benefici concedibili ai condannati, ma per designare qualsiasi, equivalente, istituto che, nell'ambito dei singoli ordinamenti, amount to the exercise of a power of clemency, whether individual or general, directed to the substantial reduction of sentence.

E 'was clearly observed in this regard that amnesty can be represented as a concentric circle is larger than all'indulto, the latter being included in the first, so that, for the purposes of Article discipline. 12, draw distinctions between the two schools is not a reasonable means of discriminating, without any prejudice, plausible rationale for a solution that permits the application of the amnesty (which extinguishes the crime and, consequently, the corresponding penalty), and simultaneously , deny the application of the pardon, which ha effetti ben più contenuti, incidendo soltanto sulla pena.

Va infine rilevato che l'eventuale interpretazione di segno difforme potrebbe indurre ad un rilievo d'incostituzionalità della legge di ratifica della Convenzione, in quanto esporrebbe il cittadino italiano condannato all'estero che sia stato trasferito in Italia per l'esecuzione della condanna ad un trattamento (irragionevolmente) deteriore rispetto agli altri detenuti, italiani e stranieri, i quali potrebbero beneficiare nella fase esecutiva della generalità degli istituti demenziali e dei benefici previsti dalle rispettive legislazioni: e ciò nonostante lo scopo dichiarato del trasferimento del condannato che è quello di favorirne il reinserimento sociale nel Pese d'origine.

8. - Di talchè, aderendo alla soluzione ermeneutica prospettata sia dalla Sezione rimettente che dal Procuratore Generale, può enunciarsi il seguente principio di diritto: "E' applicabile l'indulto (di cui, nella specie, alla L. 31 luglio 2006, n. 241) alle persone condannate all'estero e trasferite in Italia per l'espiazione della pena con la procedura stabilita dalla Convenzione di Strasburgo del 21 marzo 1983 sul trasferimento della persone condannate, ratificata e resa esecutiva in Italia con L. 25 luglio 1988, n. 334".

E, poichè la ratio decidendi dell'ordinanza impugnata non risulta coerente col principio di diritto suindicato, il ricorso va accolto disponendosi, di conseguenza, l'annullamento with referral of the contested measure. PQM


Cancel the order under appeal and refer for further examination to the Court of Appeal in Milan.

Decided in Rome, July 10, 2008.

lodged with the Registrar 23 September 2008

Funeral Thank You Notes Paster

CRIMES AGAINST THE PERSON - medication off-label - HARMFUL EFFECTS - QUALIFICATION AND

Supreme Court



JUDGEMENT NO 37077 UD.24/06/2008 - FILING OF 30/09/2008



CRIMES AGAINST THE PERSON - medication off-label - HARMFUL EFFECTS - QUALIFICATION

The Court first addressed the issue the criminal law of limitation of drugs "off label" (ie, on an experimental therapeutic purposes other than those accorded to them) and has stated that in respect of any injury to the patient derived from the administration shall assume responsibility of the doctor who has ordered only by way of fault, whichever has not adhered to the limit determined by the risk-benefit ratio when using the drug, but be irrelevant in this context the failure to acquire any of the same patient's informed consent to treatment.

Judgement No. 37077 of June 24, 2008 - filed September 30, 2008

(Fourth Criminal Chamber, President C. Licari, Rapporteur P. Piccialli)
Documenti:

Mango Leaves And Compost

'late Prof. Leopoldo Elia

Leopoldo Elia

BIOGRAFIA

Leopoldo Elia, nato a Fano il 4 novembre 1925, si è laureto il 25 novembre del 1947 in giurisprudenza, nell'Università di Roma, col massimo dei voti e la lode discutendo - relatore Prof. Vincenzo Gueli- una tesi su "L'avvento del governo parlamentare in Francia". Funzionario dell'Ufficio Legislativo del Senato, è stato Segretario del Gruppo dei Parlamentari Italiani al Consiglio d'Europa ed all'Assemblea Comune CECA, e ha successivamente svolto funzioni direttive nel Segretariato dell'Assemblea, incaricato di formulare una costituzione per l'Europa. Libero docente di diritto costituzionale, all'unanimità, nel 1959, ha poi vinto il consenso alla cattedra nella stessa disciplina (primo temato) nel 1962. Ha insegnato, per incarico, istituzioni di diritto pubblico nella facoltà di economia e commercio dell'Università di Urbino (sede di Ancona) dal 1960 al 1963; e , come professore di ruolo, diritto costituzionale nella facoltà di giurisprudenza dell'Università di Ferrara nell'anno accademico 1962-1963, dell'Università di Torino dal 1963 al 1970 e dell'Università "La Sapienza" di Roma dal 1970 al 1997, tranne che nei periodi in cui è stato posto in aspettativa quale giudice costituzionale e per mandato parlamentare. Vice Presidente Superior Council of the European University Institute in Florence. On April 30, 1976 he was elected judge of the Constitutional Court by Parliament in joint session. On 21 September 1981 he was elected President of the Constitutional Court and remained so until the end of the post of Constitutional Court (May 7, 1985). On this occasion my colleagues have given him the title of Chairman Emeritus of the Constitutional Court. In the academic year 1985-86 has taken over the teaching of constitutional law at the Faculty of Law, University "La Sapienza". Editor of the journal "Constitutional Law" from 1968 to 1976, he summed up the direction in 1986. E 'was also co-director in "Public Law" Encyclopedia of the law. On 14 June 1987 he was elected senator for the College Rome, VIII, X for the legislature, he was Minister for the electoral and institutional reforms in the government headed by Carlo Azeglio Ciampi. On 27 March 1994 he was elected, the lists of the Italian Popular Party, in the district of Lazio 2, for the XII legislature. On 21 April 1996 he was elected senator for the College of Milan 5 for the XIII legislature. At the last term he was chairman of the Senate of the PPI.

---

Author Contributions Multimedia Encyclopedia of Philosophical Sciences:

transmissions

• What is 'freedom'?

What Shoes To Wear With Navy Top

Program From the site of the eighth weekend

XI
NATIONAL COURSE FOR SPECIALIST TRAINING OF ADVOCATE
PENALTY

Programme eighth weekend

Saturday, October 11

10.00 defender and appeals by the law Dr. John Sheehan today
Canzio - Director of the Court of Cassation Massimario

12:00 am "From the Due Process just penalty "
Prof. Antonino Pulvirenti - Professor of Criminal Procedural Law University of Palermo LUMSA

13.30 Closing session 15.00 pm

prosecution of" Due Process From the just penalty "
Prof. Antonino Pulvirenti

17.00 Break
Check
17.15 End of course

19.30 Closing session


Sunday, October 12


9.00 Delivery SCHOLARSHIPS PLROMANO
final race and Proclamation Winners of Ottavio Scifo "

10.45

Break Hours 11:00 Truth and rituals nel processo penale
Prof. Francesco CAVALLA – Professore di Filosofia del Diritto Università di. Padova

Ore 13.30 Conclusione dei lavori

Ore 14.30 Deontologia e retorica
Prof. Maurizio MANZIN – Professore Ordinario di Filosofia del Diritto – Università di Trento

Ore 16.15 Saluto e comunicazioni ai corsisti
Ore 16.30 Conclusione dei lavori

Logitech Eyetoy Camera Free

dell'Ucpi

Camere Penali - Dettaglio News

La Giunta dell'UCPI, nel corso della riunione svoltasi ieri a Parma, ha effettuato le prime nomine e conferme di incarichi di settore.


L'Avv. Ettore Randazzo, già Presidente dell'UCPI, è stato confermato nel suo incarico di Responsabile Nazionale delle Scuole dell'Unione; analoga conferma per l'Avv. Gian Domenico Caiazza, quale Responsabile della Banca Dati dell'UCPI.
Il settore Editoria continuerà ad essere curato dal Prof. Avv. Giuseppe Frigo, past President dell'Unione.
Quanto all'Osservatorio Carcere, la Giunta, raccogliendo la disponibilità manifestata, ha confermato l'Avv.Roberto D'Errico quale Coordinatore.
L'Osservatorio Europa e l'Osservatorio sulla Cassazione continueranno ad essere coordinati, rispettivamente, dall'Avv. Daniele Ripamonti e dall'Avv. Domenico Battista.
La giunta ha infine confermato l'Avv. Valerio Spigarelli, già Segretario dell'Unione, as Head of the Centre for Legal Studies and Social Aldo Marongiu, "and, as members of the Board of Directors of the Centre, Prof. Carlo Guarnieri, Prof. Enrico Marzaduri, Prof. Luigi Stortoni and Prof. Nicholas Zanon.

Driver Geforce4 440 Go 64m Compaq

Lawyers: yes specializations and companies multidisciplinary

National Bar Council - Detail View

PRESS

Lawyers: yes to the skills and multidisciplinary

company's lawyers will be able to achieve the title of specialist
create companies and non-capital


09/19/2008 Rome. The Bar Council sets out the first points of the reform of the professional firm. In the first plenary session devoted entirely to the issue of reform, which was held today at Via del Governo Vecchio, the CNF has already made some innovative choices than at present. First
decided to disciplinary specializations, which must be achieved in a manner to be agreed with the orders and the most representative associations. A special regulation will provide the list of specialties recognized, professional training courses and at least two years, the requirements for local orders, the bar associations and schools for the degree of specialization. The minimum hours of training have been established in 250. The board of examiners be determined by the CNF is composed of national advisors, academics, components indicated by bar associations recognized. The degree of specialization does not lead to reserve work.
Secondly, the CNF gives way to the establishment of partnership between lawyers, not capital, open to other professionals enrolled in books that belong to categories that will be identified later by regulation.
With a focus on young people, the CNF has decided not to introduce barriers registries for election to the local Bar Council. The draft article provides that the electorate had accrued five years of registration, prediction that has not been included.
Regarding the organizational advocacy, showing sensitivity to instances of decentralization throughout the area and always respecting the autonomy of local associations, the CNF has approved the wording that acknowledges the advice of the order may be or inter-regional unions that will, if delegated by the orders that are part of, speak with the regions, local authorities and universities. Unions will need to communicate its status to the CNF. With regard to forensic
Congress, Article 1 of the draft states that the body examined yesterday expressed by Congress, if established, will provide indications, together with the councils of the order, local associations and the most representative case of security, regulations implementing the new law will be issued by the CNF professional.
The discussion in the CNF will resume Sept. 26: The plenum decided to await further orders from the comments that have requested it. The text that the CNF is considering, on the other hand, is already the result of a thorough comparison with all the components of advocacy, which has also had public events such as the general meeting open to the Orders, the OAU and all associations, which was held in Rome last September 5.

Claudia Morelli
Responsabile Ufficio stampa
Consiglio nazionale forense (www.consiglionazionaleforense.it)
Via Arenula, 71 - 00186 Roma
Tel 0039 06 6884096
Fax 0039 06 68897460
Mobile 0030 3402435953
E mail: claudiamorelli@consiglionazionaleforense.it

Indoors Rabbit Hutch Designs

TESTS - Telephone tapping - BUSINESS 'PERFORMANCE' IN REMOTE - LEGALITY '- CONDITIONS

Corte Suprema di Cassazione

SEZIONI UNITE
SENTENZA N. 36359 UD. 26/06/2008 - DEPOSITO DEL 23/09/2008


PROVE - INTERCETTAZIONI TELEFONICHE – ATTIVITA’ ESEGUITA “IN REMOTO” – LEGITTIMITA’ – CONDIZIONI

Le Sezioni Unite, nel ribadire la legittimità dell’ascolto “remotizzato” at the offices of the judicial police of the wiretaps, he pointed out that essential to the usability of it and the recording activity - that of entering data captured in a computer memory - it is done on the premises by the public prosecutor 's use of existing facilities there, where it is not necessary to be carried out even after the additional activities to record and playback any of the data thus recorded. In particular, the Court explained that the transfer of media information as recorded by the judicial systems in the office can be "remotized", since operation outside the scope of "registration", whose reliability is guaranteed by the law of the case by allowing the defense access to original recordings.

Full Text:

Judgement No. 36359 of June 26 - September 23, 2008 filed

(United Criminal Sections, President T. Gemelli, V. Romis Rapporteur)

Shotacon Manga Online Read Free

Jobs utilities: the conditions for the application.

Supreme Court - Section Six - Judgement June 27 to September 4 2008, n. 34620
President Roberto de - Stretchers Fidelbo
Applicant Attorney General at the sub-office of the Court of Appeal Sassari

The facts and law

1. With the ruling in the Court of Sassari epigraph, in the summary proceedings, the court ordered SP to the punishment of four years imprisonment and a fine of € 18,000 for the crime under Article. 73 paragraph 5 DPR 309/1990, replacing imprisonment with that of community service, as provided in paragraph 5 - a art. 73 cit., Introduced by Law of 21 February 2006, no 49.

2. The Advocate General of the sub-office of the Court of Appeal in Sassari appealed to the Supreme Court, alleging violation of the law and failure to state reasons in relation to the criteria under Article. 73 paragraph 5 - bis DPR 309/1990.
In particular, appellant complains that the ruling by finding that one prerequisite for the application of the sentence in lieu of community service is done as the configuration of the minor, while the standard also requires that the fact is committed by drug addicts or drug taker.

In another area, the applicant states that the provision does not confer rights, nor does it require that the transformation of the sentence occurs automatically, in the presence of the conditions of the law, as is the judge on a case by case , using the criteria indicated in art. Cp 133, it must assess whether or not to replace it. Assessment in this case is entirely omitted, despite two convictions against the accused to prove violation of the Narcotics Act.

3. The appeal is unfounded.

3.1. Paragraph 5 - bis art. 73 provides the possibility to apply, in lieu of imprisonment, the penalty of community service, which is to provide self-employment in favor of the community, to be implemented by the State, regions, provinces, municipalities or at agencies and assistance organizations and voluntary organizations and private structures authorized in accordance with art. Engaged 116 health and social medical care for drug addicts.

This is a sanction that involve work can be applied only where there is the individual's consent, which must specifically requested it and because the provision does not once again the mechanism of progressive formation of the sentence, so as it was envisaged by art. 33 of Legislative Decree no. 274, 2000, the Court finds that the accused may make such a request in the alternative, as was the case.

L links under the possibility of using community service to the following conditions:

a) status of drug addicts or drug taker,

b) the conviction or sentence attenuating the plea agreement that considers the fact mild;

c) request of the accused;

d) whether the conditions for granting a suspended sentence.

According to the appellant the trial court failed to assess whether the conditions for the drug P, but in this regard it should be noted that this condition was, albeit implicitly, taken into consideration in the decision under appeal, and acts of the proceedings that the accused has been replaced on remand in prison with house arrest at the therapeutic community 'Association Spring "in its decision and that was noted of his status as a drug addict. In essence, the decision under appeal has not failed to consider the subjective condition that can lead to the replacement of the prison sentence, has rather taken for granted the subjective condition of the accused, referring to relationem to the pleadings from which it was drug addiction was clear and not disputed, even by the prosecutor of the hearing.

3.2. As for the other profile of the appeal, taking issue with the decision not to have explained under what criteria has been decided to replace the prison with the work of public utilità, si rileva che il giudice ha operato una corretta valutazione al riguardo, facendo riferimento alla lieve entità del fatto, così come prescritto dall’art. 73 comma 5- bis del d.P.R. 309/1990. Non vi è stato alcun automatismo nel meccanismo attivato dalla richiesta dell’imputato - come sostiene il ricorrente -, in quanto il giudice ha ritenuto di procedere alla sostituzione dopo avere considerato la lieve entità del fatto contestato, sulla base di una opzione che non è suscettibile di controllo in sede di legittimità, qualora sia fondata, come nel caso di specie, sulla corretta applicazione della normativa.

4. In conclusione, the action of the Attorney General shall be rejected.

PQM

rejects the appeal