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

Supreme Court, Criminal Section V, Ruling No. 30133 of 2018: Reflections on External Competition in Mafia Association

The ruling No. 30133 of 2018 by the Supreme Court of Cassation, Criminal Section V, offers an important reflection on external competition in mafia association, dealing with the case of B.B., an entrepreneur accused of having established collusive relationships with Palermo mafia families. The decision of the Cassation not only clarifies the applicable legal principles but also highlights the difficulties in distinguishing between a victim entrepreneur and a colluding entrepreneur.

The Legal Context and the Facts of the Case

The Preliminary Investigating Judge had ordered the pre-trial detention of B.B. for crimes of external competition in mafia association and other related offenses. In its ruling, the Court of Review annulled part of the charges but confirmed the pre-trial detention, arguing that B.B. had established an agreement with mafia bosses to dominate the betting and slot machine market.

  • Agreement with mafia families for the exclusive management of commercial activities.
  • Payment of monthly sums as compensation for the protection provided.
  • Use of mafia methods to maintain a dominant position in the market.

The Defense's Arguments and the Court's Response

Regarding external competition in mafia association, the jurisprudence has stated that an entrepreneur who, by establishing a relationship of mutual benefits, contributes to the strengthening of the mafia association must be considered colluding.

B.B.'s defense raised objections concerning the lack of concrete evidence demonstrating his guilt, arguing that he was a victim of mafia dynamics, forced to pay the "pizzo" to avoid retaliation. However, the Court reiterated that the mere condition of being an entrepreneur does not automatically justify the qualification of "victim." In fact, it is necessary to demonstrate the absence of a "quid pluris" to configure external competition.

Conclusions and Future Implications

The ruling of the Cassation No. 30133 of 2018 represents a fundamental piece in Italian jurisprudence regarding the fight against the mafia, emphasizing how the distinction between victim entrepreneur and colluding entrepreneur is not always easy to draw. The Court clarified that it is essential to demonstrate a real contribution to the mafia association to consider external competition applicable. This decision could have significant repercussions on future similar cases, establishing an important precedent in the treatment of entrepreneurs involved in mafia activities.