Commentary on Ordinance No. 28583 of 2024: Inadmissibility of the Appeal for Abnormality

The Ordinance No. 28583 of 2024, issued by the Court of Cassation, addresses a crucial theme in criminal law: the appeal to the Court of Cassation against the orders of dismissal by the preliminary investigations judge (GIP). This provision, which has raised interest among legal practitioners, clarifies some fundamental aspects related to the inadmissibility of the appeal in the event of rejection of the opposition by the injured party.

The Legal Issues Underlying the Ordinance

First of all, the Court emphasizes that the order of dismissal cannot be challenged in cassation unless it presents abnormalities, both structural and functional. In other words, for a provision to be considered challengeable, it must necessarily manifest anomalies that undermine its legitimacy. This principle is of fundamental importance, as it safeguards the certainty of law and the stability of judicial decisions.

Order of dismissal following rejection of the opposition by the injured party - Appeal to the Court of Cassation for abnormality - Exclusion - Inadmissibility pursuant to art. 591, paragraph 1, letter B), code of criminal procedure - Existence - Applicability of the “de plano” procedure pursuant to art. 610, paragraph 5-bis, code of criminal procedure - Existence. The order of dismissal issued by the preliminary investigations judge following the rejection of the opposition by the injured party, not being affected by abnormalities either structural or functional, is not appealable to cassation and the inadmissibility, pursuant to art. 591, paragraph 1, letter b), code of criminal procedure, of the appeal that may be proposed can be declared through the 'de plano' procedure, according to art. 610, paragraph 5-bis, code of criminal procedure.

The “De Plano” Procedure and Practical Implications

The Ordinance refers to the possibility of declaring the inadmissibility of the appeal through the “de plano” procedure, provided for by the code of criminal procedure. This procedure allows the judge to quickly and informally examine the admissibility of the appeal, avoiding an in-depth examination of the merits that, in this case, would not be justified. This represents an important simplification of the process, aiming to ensure effective administration of justice.

Conclusions

In conclusion, Ordinance No. 28583 of 2024 represents an important step forward in defining the methods of challenging orders of dismissal. It confirms the need for a rigorous distinction between appealable and non-appealable provisions, strengthening the principle of legality and the guarantees for the parties involved. Legal practitioners must pay particular attention to such guidelines, as they can significantly influence defensive strategies and expectations of outcomes in criminal proceedings.

Bianucci Law Firm