Judgment No. 29346 of 2024: The Revocation of Investigative Orders in Criminal Law

The recent judgment No. 29346, issued by the Court of Cassation on March 22, 2024, raises an important reflection on the procedural dynamics related to the admission of evidence in criminal law. In a context where the correctness of the trial is fundamental, the issue of revoking investigative orders proves crucial to ensuring the right to evidence and the respect for adversarial proceedings.

The Context of the Judgment

The Court, in its decision, examined a case in which the trial judge has the possibility to revoke a previous investigative order, admitting evidence that was originally excluded. This aspect is governed by the combined provisions of Articles 190, paragraph 3, and 495, paragraph 4 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which clearly establish this possibility.

Previous investigative order - Revocation with admission of previously excluded evidence - Possibility - Conditions - Reasons. Regarding evidence, the trial judge, by virtue of what is established by the combined provisions of Articles 190, paragraph 3, and 495, paragraph 4, of the Code of Criminal Procedure, may revoke, even at the request of a party and in compliance with adversarial proceedings, a previous investigative order, admitting evidence that was originally excluded. (In its reasoning, the Court specified that the request from a party should not be equated to an appeal against the rejecting order, which is barred during the trial under Article 586 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, preserving the judge’s full discretion in their assessment).

The Conditions for Revocation of Investigative Orders

The Court emphasized that a party's request for the revocation of an investigative order should not be confused with an appeal against the order itself. This is a fundamental aspect, as it excludes the possibility of contesting a decision already made during the trial, while simultaneously ensuring the judge's discretion. The conditions for revocation include:

  • The presence of new evidence or significant elements that justify the revision.
  • The respect for adversarial proceedings, ensuring that all parties involved can express their opinions.
  • The discretionary evaluation of the judge, who must consider whether the admission of evidence could influence the outcome of the trial.

Implications of the Judgment

This judgment has significant implications for the rights of the parties in criminal proceedings. The possibility of admitting previously excluded evidence represents a guarantee for the right to defense and the pursuit of truth. Furthermore, the Court highlighted the need for a balance between the right to evidence and procedural regularity, a central theme in modern criminal law.

Conclusions

In conclusion, judgment No. 29346 of 2024 offers an important clarification on the procedural dynamics related to the admission of evidence. Thanks to its interpretation, the importance of adversarial proceedings and the right to evidence is reinforced, essential elements to ensure a fair and just trial. It is crucial that all legal practitioners become aware of these provisions to ensure the correct application of justice.

Bianucci Law Firm