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

Analysis of the Judgment of the Court of Cassation, Criminal Section VI, No. 27723 of 2018: Extortion and Forgery in a Public Document

The judgment of the Supreme Court of Cassation, Criminal Section VI, No. 27723 of June 15, 2018, provides important reflections on the crimes of extortion and forgery in a public document, highlighting the responsibility of public officials involved in unlawful conduct. The ruling is based on a case where two financial police officers abused their position to induce an entrepreneur to pay a debt, using the threat of tax inspections and a false report.

The Legal Qualification of the Crimes

The Court of Appeal of Venice had initially convicted the defendant for extortion under Article 319 quater of the Penal Code, considering that the conduct of the public official constituted an abuse of power. However, the appellant contested this qualification, arguing that his conduct should be framed as inducing error through deception, referring to Article 640 of the Penal Code.

The Court confirmed the existence of the crime of extortion, emphasizing that the abuse of power exercised by public officials clearly influenced the entrepreneur's freedom of self-determination.

In particular, the Court clarified that the crime of extortion is configured when a public official uses their position to induce a private individual to provide benefits, threatening unfavorable consequences in case of refusal.

The Court's Reasons

The Court's decision is based on a thorough analysis of the evidence, including testimonies and wiretaps. The judges highlighted that the entrepreneur had been contacted by Marshal D., who, identifying himself as a public official, threatened tax inspections. This behavior, combined with the presentation of a false document, represented a clear abuse of power, justifying the conviction for extortion.

  • Use of a false report to exert pressure
  • Threats of tax inspections as a coercive tool
  • Joint responsibility of the public officials involved

Moreover, the Court excluded the possibility of attempted extortion, as the entrepreneur had indeed promised to pay, demonstrating the effectiveness of the inducement.

Conclusions

Judgment No. 27723 of 2018 highlights the importance of protecting the freedom of self-determination of individuals against abuses by public officials. The Court clarified that the abuse of power and the use of false documents are fundamental elements for the configuration of the crime of extortion. This ruling reiterates the necessity of strict compliance with the rules by those exercising public functions, to ensure a fair and just legal system.