• via Alberto da Giussano, 26, 20145 Milano
  • +39 02 4003 1253
  • info@studiolegalebianucci.it
  • Criminal Lawyer, Family Lawyer, Divorce Lawyer

Jurisdiction and Competence in the Supreme Court Ruling No. 38623 of 2024

The recent ruling of the Supreme Court of Cassation, No. 38623 of October 21, 2024, provides important clarifications regarding conflicts of jurisdiction between courts, particularly in the context of complex crimes such as money laundering and self-laundering. This decision fits into a legal framework where the definition of jurisdiction is essential to ensure a fair trial and the effectiveness of criminal investigations.

The Context of the Jurisdictional Conflict

The jurisdictional conflict in question was raised between the Preliminary Investigating Judge (GIP) of the Bergamo Court and that of Brescia. The central issue concerned the correct identification of the place of commission of the alleged crimes, particularly those of money laundering attributed to B.B. and a criminal organization led by A.A. The GIP of Brescia had initially considered that the money laundering crimes were committed in the district of Bergamo, but subsequently declared its incompetence.

The territorial jurisdiction must be established based on the rule provided by Article 16, paragraph 1, of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which attributes it to the judge competent for the most serious crime.

The Reasons for the Court's Decision

The Court confirmed the competence of the GIP of Brescia, emphasizing the importance of establishing the place of commission of the money laundering crime. According to jurisprudence, the crime of money laundering is committed in the place where the credit institution is located at which the bank account used for the transfer of money was opened. This position is supported by a precedent from Section II of the Cassation which established that the wire transfer operation, even if conducted remotely, must be considered as committed in the location of the credit institution.

  • The Brescia GIP considered that the crime of money laundering was committed in C, where the credit institution was located.
  • The Court highlighted the importance of the teleological connection between the alleged crimes.
  • Jurisdiction was therefore attributed based on the rule of the most serious crime, established by Article 16 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Conclusion

The ruling No. 38623 of 2024 represents an important reference point for jurisprudence regarding territorial jurisdiction. It clarifies how the correct identification of the place of commission of complex crimes such as money laundering can significantly influence investigations and the criminal process. The decision of the Supreme Court reaffirms the importance of a rigorous and systematic approach in determining jurisdiction, in order to ensure the effectiveness of criminal justice and the respect of the rights of the accused.