Analysis of Judgment No. 27181 of 2024: Proceedability upon Complaint and Improceedability in Criminal Law

The judgment No. 27181 of February 21, 2024, filed on July 10 of the same year, represents an important reference point for understanding the innovations introduced by the Cartabia reform in the context of proceedability upon complaint. In particular, the case at hand highlights how, in the absence of a complaint filed within the stipulated time frame, the judge is obliged to declare the improceedability of the crime, revealing the consequences of such legislation on offenses that have become proceedable upon complaint.

The Legal Context

Legislative Decree No. 150 of 2022 has introduced significant changes regarding criminal proceedability, emphasizing the necessity of a complaint as a prerequisite for criminal action in certain cases. According to Article 85 of the aforementioned legislative decree, if the deadline for filing the complaint expires without it being submitted, the crime is considered improceedable. This change aims to limit criminal actions in situations where there is no direct interest from the victim, responding to a need for greater efficiency in the judicial system.

The Principle of Improceedability

Proceedability upon complaint due to the amendment referred to in Legislative Decree No. 150 of 2022 (so-called Cartabia reform) - Expiration of the term for filing a complaint pursuant to Article 85 of the cited legislative decree - Obligation of immediate declaration of improceedability pursuant to Article 129 of the Code of Criminal Procedure - Existence - Supplementary contestation of an aggravating circumstance pursuant to Article 517, Code of Criminal Procedure - Possibility - Exclusion - Abuse of process - Case. Regarding crimes that have become proceedable upon complaint due to the amendment referred to in Legislative Decree of October 10, 2022, No. 150, the trial judge, where the term provided by Article 85 of the cited legislative decree has expired in the absence of a complaint being filed, following the establishment of adversarial proceedings and the admission of evidence, is obliged to pronounce a judgment of improceedability pursuant to Article 129 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, as the contestation of an aggravating circumstance aimed solely at making the crime proceedable ex officio is ineffective, being indicative of an abuse of process by the public prosecutor. (Case related to the theft of electricity).

The judge, therefore, has no discretion in deciding: if the term for the complaint has expired and it has not been filed, he must necessarily declare the improceedability of the criminal action. This position has been confirmed by the Court of Cassation, which emphasized how the contestation of an aggravating circumstance by the public prosecutor, aimed at making the crime proceedable ex officio, can be considered an abuse of process.

Conclusions

This ruling represents an important step in strengthening the principle of legality and respect for the rights of the parties in the criminal process. The Cartabia reform, through these provisions, aims to reduce the workload of the courts and ensure that criminal actions are initiated only in the presence of an actual interest from the injured party. The obligation to declare improceedability in the absence of a complaint clarifies the boundaries of criminal action, promoting a fairer justice system less susceptible to abuses.

Bianucci Law Firm