Judgment No. 30440 of 2024: the Return of Documents to the Public Prosecutor and the Abnormality of the Act

The recent judgment No. 30440 of March 14, 2024, by the Court of Cassation has sparked extensive debate among criminal law experts, as it addresses the fundamental issue of the return of documents to the public prosecutor by the trial judge. This topic is crucial for ensuring the proper administration of justice and avoiding unjustified delays in criminal proceedings.

The Context of the Judgment

The Court established that the order of the judge returning the documents to the public prosecutor is abnormal in the presence of generality or indeterminacy of the charge, without having first urged the public prosecutor to integrate or clarify the accusation. This decision is based on a principle of economy and reasonable duration of the trial, essential for the proper functioning of the Italian judicial system.

Return of documents to the public prosecutor by the trial judge for generality and indeterminacy of the charge - Lack of prior urging to the aforementioned for the integration or clarification of the accusation - Abnormal act - Existence - Reasons. It is abnormal, due to its tendency to cause an undue regression of the proceedings, the order of the trial judge which, in the case of generality or indeterminacy of the charge, returns the documents to the public prosecutor without first urging him to integrate or clarify the accusation. (In its reasoning, the Court specified that the principle of economy and reasonable duration of the trial requires that the judge does not adopt a declaration of nullity before having carried out the necessary activities to remove its cause).

The Practical Implications of the Judgment

This judgment has important repercussions on judicial practice. First of all, it emphasizes the judge's obligation to act diligently in verifying the completeness and clarity of the charge. The Court, recalling the New Code of Criminal Procedure, highlights that the return cannot be the first solution, but must be preceded by an attempt at clarification by the public prosecutor.

  • Encourage greater clarity in the accusation.
  • Reduce the risk of procedural abnormalities.
  • Respect the principle of reasonable duration of the trial.

Conclusions

Judgment No. 30440 of 2024 represents a significant step towards a more efficient and less bureaucratic justice system. It urges judges to exercise their power carefully, avoiding decisions that may lead to a regression of the proceedings. It is essential that all legal practitioners understand the implications of this judgment to ensure that the principle of procedural economy is always respected, thereby contributing to a fairer and more functional legal system.

Bianucci Law Firm