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

Judgment Cass. pen. n. 29549/2020: Corruption of Public Officials and Plurality of Acts

The judgment n. 29549 of October 23, 2020, of the Court of Cassation offers an important opportunity for reflection on the theme of corruption of public officials, particularly regarding the assessment of the plurality of corrupt episodes and the need for adequate reasoning by the judge. In this case, the defendant, a prison police officer, had been convicted of having accepted sums of money to allow the entry of prohibited items into the prison. The Court of Appeal of Naples had confirmed the conviction, but the Cassation subsequently annulled the judgment, providing significant points for reflection.

The Legal Context of the Judgment

The Court of Cassation, examining the appeal, first highlighted the importance of reasoning in the judgment of merit. In particular, the first reason for the appeal was declared inadmissible due to vagueness, as it did not specifically contest the assessment of the evidence by the Court of Appeal. It is essential, in the appeal stage, for the defense to present clear and detailed arguments; otherwise, the appeal risks being considered little more than a mere reiteration of the defensive theses.

The act performed by the public official is not part of the structure of the crime and does not have significance for determining the consummation moment.

Plurality of Corrupt Episodes and Continuation of the Crime

A crucial aspect of the judgment concerns the recognition of the continuation of the crime. The Court of Cassation clarified that, for the configuration of a plurality of corrupt acts, there must be multiple specific agreements. In this case, the Court deemed that the illegal agreement between the agent and the briber was unique, despite the monthly payment methods. This leads to the conclusion that the continuation of the crime cannot be applied in the absence of clear and specific evidence of multiple distinct corrupt episodes.

  • The crime of corruption requires careful evaluation of the evidence.
  • The reasoning of the judgment must be clear and detailed to avoid unfounded appeals.
  • The plurality of corrupt acts must be demonstrated through specific agreements.

Conclusions

In conclusion, judgment n. 29549/2020 of the Court of Cassation emphasizes the importance of reasoning and clarity in evidence regarding corruption. The decision to annul the conviction due to the lack of adequate demonstration of the plurality of corrupt episodes represents an important reminder for judges of merit and for the parties involved in the criminal process. It is essential that every accusation is supported by concrete evidence and that the judge adequately motivates their decisions so that the legal system can ensure justice in a fair and transparent manner.