Commentary on Judgment No. 16468 of 2024: Flaws in Motivation in the DASPO

The judgment No. 16468 of 2024, issued by the Court of Cassation, offers significant reflections regarding the measure imposed by the police chief requiring presentation to the public security authority, known as DASPO. This ruling, which annulled the order of the investigating judge with referral, highlights the centrality of motivation in restrictive measures of personal freedom, especially in the context of sporting events.

The Regulatory Context and the Function of DASPO

The DASPO is a preventive measure adopted to combat violence during sporting events. Pursuant to Article 6 of Law No. 401 of December 13, 1989, the police chief can adopt such a measure in the presence of specific conditions aimed at ensuring public safety. However, the validation by the investigating judge is essential to ensure that such a measure respects the fundamental rights of individuals.

  • Conditions legitimizing the measure
  • Importance of motivation
  • Possible consequences in case of flaws

The Flaw in Motivation and Its Implications

Measure imposed by the police chief requiring presentation to the public security authority (so-called DASPO) - Validation by the investigating judge - Flaw in motivation - Annulment with referral - Reasons. In matters of measures aimed at preventing violence during sporting events, the order of the investigating judge validating the measure of the police chief under Article 6 of Law No. 401 of December 13, 1989, issued in the presence of the conditions legitimizing its adoption, but affected by a flaw in motivation, must be annulled with referral. (In its reasoning, the Court specified that, by validating even the effects of the validated provisional act and determining its consolidation, the mere annulment with referral ensures the temporary paralysis, pending the definition of the rescissory procedure, of the effectiveness of the legal title justifying personal freedom).

The Court emphasized that, although the police chief's measure was legitimate in its premises, the lack of adequate motivation results in annulment with referral. This aspect is crucial, as it ensures that restrictive measures are always supported by adequate justification, protecting the rights of citizens and their personal freedom.

Conclusions

Judgment No. 16468 of 2024 represents an important reference point in the jurisprudence concerning DASPO and preventive measures in the sporting field. It reaffirms the necessity of a clear and detailed motivation in measures that limit personal freedom. Only in this way can fairness and justice be guaranteed, preventing measures, however legitimate in their premises, from becoming ineffective or even harmful to citizens' rights. In conclusion, the ruling of the Court of Cassation reminds us that form and substance must always proceed hand in hand in respect of legality and fundamental rights.

Bianucci Law Firm