Analysis of Judgment No. 40153 of 2024: Invalidity Due to Lack of Translation in Extradition
The recent judgment No. 40153, filed on October 30, 2024, by the Court of Cassation, sheds new light on extradition procedures, placing a strong emphasis on the importance of linguistic understanding during the legal process. In particular, the Court established that the failure to translate the precautionary order concerning an extraditee who does not speak Italian renders the act null.
The Context of the Judgment
In the case at hand, the defendant, B. R., was in a situation of extradition abroad, and the Court of Appeal of Milan had issued a precautionary order. However, the order had not been translated into a language comprehensible to the defendant, who did not speak Italian. The Court of Cassation deemed this procedural error so severe that it resulted in the nullity of the act, highlighting the defendant's right to understand the measures concerning him.
Extraditee who does not understand the Italian language - Failure to translate the order imposing the precautionary measure - Nullity - Existence - Ineffectiveness - Exclusion. In terms of extradition abroad, the failure to translate the order applying the precautionary measure against the extraditee who does not know the Italian language determines its nullity, resulting in the regression of the proceedings to the state in which the null act was performed, for the translation and renewal of the subsequent acts. (In reasoning, the Court specified that in this case the ineffectiveness of the coercive measure does not occur, as the five-day term for taking the interrogation referred to in Article 717, paragraph 1, of the criminal procedure code is not peremptory).
Legal Implications of the Judgment
The judgment in question highlights some fundamental legal issues, particularly regarding the respect for the rights of the defendant. Among the key points that emerge are:
- Nullity of the act: The absence of translation not only renders the act null but also requires the repetition of the affected procedural phase.
- Language rights: The judgment reaffirms the individual's right to understand the legal measures that concern them, in line with the principles of fairness and justice.
- Time limits: The Court clarified that the lack of translation does not determine the ineffectiveness of the precautionary measure, emphasizing that the deadlines set by law are not always peremptory.
Conclusions
Judgment No. 40153 of 2024 represents an important step forward in the protection of the rights of defendants in extradition proceedings. It highlights the need to ensure that every person involved in a legal process can fully understand the decisions that affect them, regardless of the language spoken. The implications of this judgment extend beyond the specific case, raising broader questions about justice and the fairness of legal procedures in an increasingly global context.
