Supreme Court of Cassation, Criminal Section, No. 13841/2025: The object of political-mafia electoral exchange is "any other utility"

With ruling 13841/2025, the VI Section of the Court of Cassation annuls with referral the ordinance of the Court of Appeal of Catania and intervenes once again on art. 416-ter of the Italian Criminal Code, redefined by Law no. 43 of May 21, 2019. The core of the decision lies in the interpretation of the expression "any other utility" as a possible object of the pact between a politician and a mafia association. A broad notion that, as we will see, extends the scope of the rule and strengthens the tools for combating organized crime in electoral matters.

Procedural Facts and Scope of Review

The defendant V. M. was subject to a precautionary measure for having promised electoral support to a candidate in exchange – according to the prosecution – for unspecified utilities. The Court of Appeal had downplayed the evidentiary gravity, holding that the advantage offered was neither "concrete" nor "financially appreciable." The Court of Cassation, on appeal by the Public Prosecutor A. P., overturned this approach, deeming any benefit sufficient, even if intangible, as long as it is capable of satisfying the interests of the association.

Core Rationale: Extensive Interpretation of "Utility"

For the purpose of establishing the crime of political-mafia electoral exchange, under the text following the amendments introduced by Law no. 43 of May 21, 2019, the material object of the provision offered in exchange for the promise of votes can consist of "any other utility," an expression that encompasses any advantageous effect, even if not economically quantifiable.

The above maxim definitively supersedes those decisions (Sez. 6, n. 51659/2023) that linked "utility" to a financial return. The panel presided over by G. D. A. observes that the 2019 reform intended to fill the gray areas left by the previous wording, equating financial compensation with any other benefit – political, relational, or reputational – capable of consolidating the illicit alliance.

Legal Aspects and Practical Implications

• Objective Element: The promise or offer of "any utility" is sufficient, without needing to prove its monetary value.
• Subjective Element: Awareness of the exchange being functional to influencing the vote is required.
• Precautionary Measures: The broad notion of utility strengthens the indication of gravity, making it easier to apply restrictive measures pursuant to art. 275 of the Italian Code of Criminal Procedure.
• Statute of Limitations: Remains anchored to the ten-year term, but the extension of the object may affect the running of the period pursuant to art. 160 of the Italian Criminal Code.

It is interesting to note the consistency with the conforming ruling no. 43186/2024, while the dissenting rulings from 2011-2013 that required "financial reciprocity" are now superseded.

Comparison with European Legislation

The Court of Cassation's approach aligns with the GRECO Recommendations and Directive (EU) 2017/1371, which urge Member States to repress all forms of political corruption, including non-pecuniary advantages (e.g., appointments or undue influence). The extensive interpretation therefore appears consistent with the need for European harmonization.

Conclusions

Ruling 13841/2025 represents a decisive step in the fight against political-mafia electoral exchange: the bartering of vote packages for benefits becomes punishable even when the utility is not measurable in money. This requires legal professionals to recalibrate defense and prosecution strategies, valuing "qualitative" evidentiary elements – such as promises of political support or protection – which previously risked remaining on the margins of criminal proceedings. A strong signal towards the protection of democratic integrity, in line with the most recent international standards.