Comment on Judgment No. 46801 of 2024: Expulsion and Parole in Criminal Law

Judgment No. 46801 of 2024, issued by the Court of Cassation, offers important insights regarding the security measures applied to convicted individuals, particularly concerning expulsion from the territory of the State and parole. This decision fits into a constantly evolving legal context, where the balance between public safety and individual rights becomes increasingly complex.

The Context of the Judgment

The judgment in question deals with the appeal against a ruling by the surveillance magistrate who ordered the expulsion of a convicted individual. The Court deemed admissible the substitution of this measure with parole, should the former be considered excessively burdensome. This aspect is crucial as it reflects an "in bonam partem" evaluative approach regarding the individual's social dangerousness, respecting the principles of adequacy and proportionality of security measures.

Expulsion from the territory of the State - Appeal against the ruling of the surveillance magistrate applying the measure - Substitution with parole - Admissibility - Criteria. Regarding security measures, the surveillance court, called to decide on the appeal against the ruling of the surveillance magistrate ordering the expulsion of the convicted individual from the territory of the State, may substitute the original measure, where deemed excessively burdensome, with that of parole, conducting an "in bonam partem" evaluation of the individual's social dangerousness, in compliance with the standards of adequacy and proportionality of personal security measures.

Analysis of Legal Principles

The decision of the Court of Cassation is based on several regulatory references, including Articles 228 and 235 of the Penal Code, and Article 27 of the Constitution, which establishes the principle of humanity of punishments. The Constitutional Court has repeatedly emphasized the importance of measures that respect human dignity, and the judgment under examination fits perfectly within this framework.

Moreover, the criteria of adequacy and proportionality are fundamental in modern criminal law. These principles ensure that the measures adopted do not exceed the severity of the committed offense and that they effectively respond to the social reintegration needs of the convicted individual. Parole, in this context, presents itself as a less burdensome measure, allowing for greater integration of the individual into society.

Conclusions

In conclusion, Judgment No. 46801 of 2024 represents a significant step towards a more humanitarian and proportional conception of security measures in criminal law. It demonstrates how the Italian legal system is capable of adapting to the needs of social justice while ensuring the safety of citizens. It is essential that legal professionals and citizens themselves are aware of these dynamics, to promote a balanced approach between security and fundamental rights.

Bianucci Law Firm