Judgment No. 36775 of 2024: Professional Secrecy and Its Limitation in Criminal Proceedings
The recent judgment No. 36775 of July 4, 2024, filed on October 3, 2024, has sparked extensive debate among legal scholars and attorneys. In it, the Court addressed the issue of professional secrecy, establishing that it can only be invoked by witnesses and not by suspects or defendants. This distinction has significant repercussions on the management of evidence in the Italian criminal process, affecting the right to defense and the effectiveness of investigations.
Regulatory Context of Professional Secrecy
The ruling fits within a complex regulatory context. According to Article 200 of the New Code of Criminal Procedure, professional secrecy is protected, but with limitations. The Court reiterated that only witnesses can invoke this secrecy to oppose the request for the production of evidence, while suspects and defendants are excluded from such possibility. This exclusion is based on public interest reasons and the necessity to ensure the effectiveness of criminal justice.
Reference Maxims and Their Interpretation
Professional secrecy - Opposition by the suspect or defendant - Exclusion - Reasons. Regarding evidence, professional secrecy can only be invoked by the witness and not by the suspect or defendant, for whom only state secrecy is opposable to the criminal magistrate. (Conf.: No. 3288 of 1990, Rv. 185191-01).
This maxim highlights the clear distinction between the figures involved in the process. The suspect or defendant, not having the possibility to invoke professional secrecy, must face the trial with the evidence presented by the prosecution. This may seem like a limitation on the right to defense, but it actually serves to ensure the effectiveness of criminal proceedings. Jurisprudence has consistently emphasized the importance of balancing the right to defense with the demands of justice and truth.
Practical Implications of the Decision
- Greater clarity for legal professionals regarding the role of professional secrecy.
- Possibility of an increase in the collection of evidence in criminal matters.
- Need to rethink the defense strategies of defendants and suspects.
This ruling offers food for thought for attorneys and legal professionals, as it implies that while professional secrecy is an important right, its applications are limited in the context of a criminal proceeding. The Court has emphasized the necessity to ensure that investigations can proceed without obstacles arising from the misuse of this secrecy.
Conclusions
In conclusion, judgment No. 36775 of 2024 represents an important step forward in clarifying the role of professional secrecy in criminal proceedings. It underscores the essential need to ensure the effectiveness of investigations while protecting the rights of the individuals involved. It remains crucial for suspects and defendants to be aware of the limitations of their right to oppose the production of evidence, while adhering to defense strategies that can address this new legal reality.
