Analysis of Judgment No. 2076 of 2024: External Complicity and Bilateral Relations in the Crime of Subversive Association

Judgment No. 2076 of October 9, 2024, filed on January 17, 2025, represents an important step in Italian jurisprudence concerning external complicity in the crime of subversive association. In particular, the Court of Cassation has clarified some fundamental aspects regarding the relationship between an individual and a criminal group, establishing that mere adherence to the associative aims is not sufficient to constitute external complicity.

The Concept of External Complicity

External complicity, as outlined by Article 270-bis of the Italian Criminal Code, refers to situations where a person, while not an integral part of a criminal organization, actively contributes to its activities. The recent judgment emphasized that to establish such complicity, a bilateral relationship with the criminal association is necessary.

Art. 270-bis of the Criminal Code - External Complicity – Unilateral manifestation of adherence to associative aims – Irrelevance - Bilateral relationship with the criminal association – Necessity. External complicity in the crime of association with aims of terrorism or subversion of the democratic order requires that the perpetrator, not organically integrated into the associative structure, does not limit themselves to a unilateral manifestation of adherence to the aims pursued by it, but always operates within the framework of a bilateral relationship with the criminal group and makes a contribution aimed at satisfying its specific needs.

Implications of the Judgment

This judgment offers a clear distinction between passive and active adherence. Indeed, a person cannot be considered an external accomplice simply because they express an interest in the group's aims. Concrete and operational interaction is necessary, where the person provides a useful contribution to achieving the organization's objectives.

• Bilateral relationship: Indispensable for external complicity.
• Unilateral manifestation: Considered irrelevant for the commission of the crime.
• Active contribution: Essential for criminal liability.

This interpretation is also based on previous case law, such as judgments by the United Sections, which have set guidelines for the interpretation of Article 270-bis.

Conclusions

Judgment No. 2076 of 2024 offers important insights into the concept of external complicity in the crime of subversive association. The necessity of a bilateral relationship, rather than mere adherence to associative aims, represents a key element for understanding the dynamics of criminal liability in this area. Legal professionals, and others, must keep these indications in mind to avoid confusion in the application of current legislation and ensure a fair trial.