Judgment No. 51388 of 2023: Unjustified Carrying of Offensive Objects and the Fine Penalty

Judgment No. 51388 of November 24, 2023, represents an important ruling by the Court of Cassation on criminal law, concerning the unjustified carrying of objects capable of causing offense. In particular, the Court ruled on the qualification of the act as minor in nature and on the resulting sanctions, establishing a principle of significant interest for jurisprudence and legal practice.

The Regulatory Framework

The matter under discussion falls within the regulatory framework of Law of April 18, 1975, No. 110, which governs the carrying of weapons and objects capable of causing offense. Pursuant to Article 4, paragraph 3, the offense can be qualified as minor in nature, in which case the law provides for the application of the fine penalty only. The Court clarified that the use of the word "may" does not imply judicial discretion but rather a duty to apply the lighter penalty in cases of minimal gravity.

The Ruling's Headnote

Unjustified carrying of objects capable of causing offense - Recognition of the minor nature of the act - Application of the fine penalty only - Necessity. Regarding the unjustified carrying of objects capable of causing offense, the qualification of the act as minor in nature pursuant to Article 4, paragraph 3, last part, of Law of April 18, 1975, No. 110, entails the application of the fine penalty only. This is regardless of the fact that the expression "may" was used in the wording of the provision, as the mitigating circumstance is justified by the disproportionate nature of the combined penalty of arrest and fine for acts characterized by minimal gravity.

The ruling highlights how, in cases of unjustified carrying of objects capable of causing offense, the assessment of the minor nature of the act can lead to a more favorable sanctioning treatment for the defendant. This approach is in line with the principle of proportionality, which must always guide the application of penalties, especially when dealing with less serious offenses.

Legal and Practical Implications

The implications of the judgment are manifold:

• Recognition of the need for a careful assessment of the gravity of the act by judges.
• Possibility of applying less burdensome sanctions for minor offenses, promoting fairer justice.
• Strengthening the protection of defendants' rights through the application of penalties proportionate to the gravity of the offense.

In a legal system that aims to ensure fairness and justice, Judgment No. 51388 of 2023 represents an important step forward towards a more just and proportionate sanctioning treatment.

Conclusions

In conclusion, the judgment of the Court of Cassation offers an important reflection on the need for a proportional approach to criminal sanctions, especially for minor offenses. The qualification of the act as minor in nature allows, in fact, to avoid the application of excessive penalties, promoting a more balanced justice that respects fundamental rights. This jurisprudential trend could have a significant impact on the daily practice of criminal law, supporting a more humane and rational view of justice.