Confiscation by Equivalent of Future Assets: Analysis of Judgment No. 33091 of 2024

Judgment No. 33091 of June 14, 2024, issued by the Court of Cassation, addresses a crucial issue in criminal law: confiscation by equivalent of future assets. Specifically, the Court ruled that such confiscation cannot apply to assets acquired by a convicted person after the order has become final and unappealable. This decision is part of an ever-evolving legal landscape and offers food for thought on how asset-based sanctions are managed.

Confiscation by Equivalent: Definition and Regulatory Context

Confiscation by equivalent is a punitive measure provided for by the Italian Penal Code, applicable when direct confiscation of assets derived from illicit activities is not possible. This legal instrument aims to target the convicted person's assets, deterring unlawful conduct. Article 240 of the Penal Code and Article 321 of the new Code of Criminal Procedure govern the application of this measure.

Meaning of the Judgment's Maxim

Confiscation by equivalent of future assets - Exclusion - Reasons. Confiscation by equivalent, given its punitive nature, cannot apply to assets that come into the convicted person's possession after the order has become final and unappealable. (The Court also emphasized the difference with seizure for the purpose of confiscation by equivalent, which, despite having the same punitive nature, can also target future assets as it is a precautionary measure intended to enable confiscation to take effect).

This maxim highlights a fundamental principle: confiscation by equivalent must be limited to assets that were already in the convicted person's possession at the time the judgment became final and unappealable. This means that assets acquired subsequently cannot be confiscated, thereby protecting property rights and ensuring a balance between punitive needs and individual rights.

Practical Implications of the Judgment

The Court of Cassation's decision has several practical implications:

• Regulatory clarity: The Court confirms the distinction between confiscation and seizure, clarifying that seizure can encompass future assets, while confiscation by equivalent cannot.
• Protection of the convicted person's rights: The judgment safeguards the right to property for assets acquired after conviction.
• Potential repercussions on criminal proceedings: The judgment could influence defense strategies for defendants and the methods for applying asset-related security measures.

Conclusions

In conclusion, judgment No. 33091 of 2024 represents a significant step forward in defining the limits of confiscation by equivalent within our legal system. It not only clarifies the scope of this measure but also reaffirms the fundamental principles of protecting individual rights. It will be interesting to observe how this decision influences future legal cases and the practices for managing punitive measures in Italy.