Commentary on Order No. 28583 of 2024: Inadmissibility of Appeal due to Abnormality

Order No. 28583 of 2024, issued by the Court of Cassation, addresses a crucial issue in criminal law: the possibility of appealing to the Court of Cassation against orders of dismissal issued by the preliminary investigations judge (GIP). This ruling, which has garnered interest among legal professionals, clarifies fundamental aspects related to the inadmissibility of an appeal in cases where the victim's opposition is rejected.

The Legal Issues Underlying the Order

Firstly, the Court emphasizes that an order of dismissal cannot be appealed to the Court of Cassation unless it exhibits abnormality, either structural or functional. In other words, for a measure to be considered appealable, it must necessarily display anomalies that prejudice its legitimacy. This principle is of fundamental importance, as it safeguards legal certainty and the stability of judicial decisions.

Order of dismissal following the rejection of the victim's opposition - Appealability to the Court of Cassation for abnormality - Exclusion - Inadmissibility pursuant to Article 591, paragraph 1, letter B), Code of Criminal Procedure - Existence - Applicability of the 'de plano' procedure pursuant to Article 610, paragraph 5-bis, Code of Criminal Procedure - Existence. The order of dismissal issued by the preliminary investigations judge following the rejection of the victim's opposition, not being affected by structural or functional abnormality, is not appealable to the Court of Cassation, and the inadmissibility, pursuant to Article 591, paragraph 1, letter b), of the Code of Criminal Procedure, of any appeal filed can be declared by 'de plano' procedure, pursuant to Article 610, paragraph 5-bis, of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

The 'De Plano' Procedure and Practical Implications

The Order 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 which, in this case, would not be justified. This represents an important simplification of the process, aimed at ensuring effective administration of justice.

Conclusions

In conclusion, Order No. 28583 of 2024 represents a significant step forward in defining the methods for appealing orders of dismissal. It confirms the need for a rigorous distinction between appealable and non-appealable measures, strengthening the principle of legality and the guarantees for the parties involved. Legal professionals must pay particular attention to these orientations, as they can significantly influence defense strategies and expected outcomes in criminal proceedings.