Judgment No. 28144 of 2024: Clarifications on Direct Summons to Trial and the Penalty Limit

The judgment No. 28144 of June 10, 2024, filed on July 15 of the same year, provides important clarifications regarding the exercise of criminal action in relation to direct summons to trial. In particular, the Court addressed the issue of the penalty limit of imprisonment not exceeding four years, establishing that this limit must be considered fixed and referred to the legislation in force at the time of the criminal action.

The Principle of "Tempus Regit Actum"

The legal principle of "tempus regit actum" indicates that the law applicable to a given act is that in force at the time of its execution. In the case at hand, the Court reiterated that the referral provided for by Article 550 of the Code of Criminal Procedure must be interpreted in such a way as to take into account the existing legislation at the time the criminal action is exercised, rather than the substantive law applicable to the defendant.

  • The Court held that the referral to the penalty of imprisonment not exceeding four years should be considered fixed.
  • This implies that any subsequent legislative changes do not affect the criminal action already initiated.
  • The decision to return the acts to the public prosecutor was considered not abnormal.

The Implications of the Judgment

This judgment has significant consequences for the Italian criminal system, as it clarifies the applicability of the rules in the context of initiated criminal proceedings and the responsibility of the public prosecutor in deciding the type of action to take. Furthermore, the Court highlighted how the correct interpretation of the rule can influence the management of the trial and the rights of the defendants.

Direct summons to trial - Limit of the penalty of imprisonment not exceeding four years - Nature of the referral - Principle of "tempus regit actum" - Applicability - Consequences - Case. In terms of the exercise of criminal action with direct summons to trial, the referral to the penalty of imprisonment "not exceeding a maximum of four years," contained in Article 550 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, must be understood as "fixed," as, due to the non-derogability of the principle "tempus regit actum," it refers to the law in force at the time of the exercise of the criminal action and not to the substantive law actually applicable to the defendant based on the succession criteria set forth in Article 2 of the Criminal Code. (In the case, the Court deemed the decision to return the acts to the public prosecutor, who had issued a decree for direct summons to trial concerning an act committed during the validity of Article 176 of Legislative Decree No. 42 of January 22, 2004, not abnormal, despite the indictment having already transitioned into the provision of Article 518-bis of the Criminal Code, whose penalty limits required a request for referral to trial with the scheduling of a preliminary hearing).

Conclusions

In conclusion, judgment No. 28144 of 2024 represents an important step forward in regulatory clarity regarding the criminal action in the case of direct summons to trial. The principles established by the Court can significantly influence legal practice and the protection of the rights of defendants, emphasizing the importance of a rigorous interpretation of the applicable laws.

Bianucci Law Firm