Analysis of Judgment No. 2076 of 2024: External Participation and Bilateral Relationships in the Crime of Subversive Association

Judgment No. 2076 of October 9, 2024, filed on January 17, 2025, represents an important step in Italian jurisprudence regarding external participation in the crime of subversive association. In particular, the Court of Cassation has clarified some fundamental aspects concerning the relationship between the individual and the criminal group, establishing that mere adherence to associative purposes is not sufficient to configure external participation.

The Concept of External Participation

External participation, as outlined by Article 270-bis of the Penal Code, refers to those situations in which a subject, while not being an integral part of a criminal organization, actively contributes to its activities. The recent judgment emphasized that to configure such participation, a bilateral relationship with the criminal association is necessary.

Art. 270-bis Penal Code - External Participation – Unilateral Manifestation of Adherence to Associative Purposes – Irrelevance - Bilateral Relationship with the Criminal Association – Necessity. External participation in the crime of association with the purpose of terrorism or subverting the democratic order requires that the agent, not organically integrated into the associative structure, does not limit himself to a unilateral manifestation of adherence to the purposes pursued by it, but operates within a bilateral relationship with the criminal group and provides a contribution aimed at meeting its specific needs.

Implications of the Judgment

This judgment offers a clear distinction between passive and active adherence. In fact, a subject cannot be considered an external participant simply because he shows an interest in the purposes of the group. It is necessary for there to be a concrete and operational interaction, in which the subject provides a useful contribution to achieving the objectives of the organization.

  • Bilateral relationship: Essential for external participation.
  • Unilateral manifestation: Considered irrelevant for the configuration of the crime.
  • Active contribution: Essential for criminal liability.

This interpretation is also grounded in previous jurisprudential rulings, such as the judgments of the United Sections, which have established guidelines for the interpretation of Article 270-bis.

Conclusions

Judgment No. 2076 of 2024 provides important insights into the concept of external participation in the crime of subversive association. The necessity of a bilateral relationship, rather than a simple adherence to associative purposes, represents a key element for understanding the dynamics of criminal responsibilities in this area. Legal practitioners, and not only them, must keep these indications in mind to avoid confusion in the application of current legislation and ensure a fair trial.

Bianucci Law Firm