Italian cultural heritage represents an invaluable treasure, a legacy of centuries of history and creativity that requires constant and rigorous protection. The counterfeiting of works of art is not only an economic fraud but a direct attack on the authenticity and integrity of this heritage. In a constantly evolving legal context, legal certainty is fundamental. The judgment of the Court of Cassation, no. 27673 of 2025, fits precisely into this scenario, providing essential clarification regarding the normative continuity between the old and new provisions that sanction the crime of counterfeiting works of art. This ruling is of particular interest for understanding how our legal system guarantees the protection of cultural heritage even in the face of legislative changes.

The Regulatory Context: From the Old to the New Discipline

Before delving into the analysis of the judgment, it is appropriate to retrace the relevant regulatory framework. Until recently, the crime of counterfeiting works of art was governed by Article 178 of Legislative Decree 22 January 2004, no. 42, known as the "Code of Cultural Heritage and Landscape." This provision aimed to combat the reproduction, alteration, or commercialization of false or altered works of art, protecting both the intrinsic value of the work and public trust. However, with the entry into force of Law 9 March 2022, no. 22, there has been a reorganization of the criminal matters relating to cultural heritage. In particular, Article 5, paragraph 2, letter b), of the aforementioned law formally repealed Article 178 of Legislative Decree no. 42/2004, while simultaneously introducing, with Article 1, paragraph 1, letter b), a new criminal offense into the Penal Code: Article 518-quaterdecies c.p., titled "Counterfeiting of Works of Art."

This amendment raised questions about the fate of illicit conduct committed under the old rule, or during a transitional period. The central issue is whether the repeal of the old rule resulted in the decriminalization of conduct or whether, on the contrary, there was a simple "transfer" of the crime to a new regulatory seat, keeping its criminal relevance intact. This is where the principle of "normative continuity" comes into play, which is fundamental for legal certainty and to avoid gaps in protection.

The Ruling of the Court of Cassation and the Principle of "Abrogatio Sine Abolitione"

The Court of Cassation, with judgment no. 27673 of 2025, provided a clear and unequivocal answer to these questions, affirming the existence of normative continuity between the two provisions. The ruling of the judgment, delivered in the case of the defendant O. N. and reported by Counselor A. S., is illuminating:

In matters of crimes against cultural heritage, there is normative continuity between the offense under art. 178 of Legislative Decree 22 January 2004, no. 42, formally repealed by art. 5, paragraph 2, letter b), of Law 9 March 2022, no. 22, and that under art. 518-quaterdecies of the Penal Code, introduced by art. 1, paragraph 1, letter b), of the same law, which criminally sanctions the same conduct of counterfeiting works of art previously punished by the prior provision, falling under the hypothesis of "abrogatio sine abolitione."

This statement is crucial. The Court, presided over by Dr. L. R., declared the appeal of the Tribunal for the Liberty of Verona inadmissible, confirming the orientation that there has been no gap in punishability. The concept of "abrogatio sine abolitione" (repeal without abolition) means that, although a norm has been formally repealed, its prescriptive and sanctioning substance has been reproduced in a new legislative provision. In other words, the conduct considered a crime by Article 178 of Legislative Decree no. 42/2004 remained so even after the introduction of Article 518-quaterdecies c.p., simply changing its "location" in the legal system.

This principle is fundamental for several reasons:

• Continuity of Protection: It ensures that the protection of cultural heritage does not suffer interruptions due to legislative reforms.
• Legal Certainty: It provides clarity to legal professionals and citizens regarding the continued criminal relevance of certain conduct.
• Effectiveness of Criminal Law: It prevents those responsible for serious crimes from evading justice by claiming an abrupt de facto "decriminalization."

The judgment in question aligns with previous case law (such as judgments no. 39603 of 2024 and no. 36265 of 2023) that have already addressed similar issues, consolidating an interpretive orientation in favor of normative continuity in crimes against cultural heritage.

Practical Implications and the Protection of Cultural Heritage

The implications of this judgment are significant. For investigators and judges, the ruling of the Court of Cassation confirms the full operability of criminal law against the counterfeiting of works of art, regardless of the date of commission of the act, provided it falls within the period of validity of the norms in question. For potential offenders, the message is clear: acts of counterfeiting remain illicit and punishable, without loopholes arising from formal changes in the law.

This strengthens the Italian State's commitment to combating illicit trafficking and falsification of cultural goods, a phenomenon that often has international ramifications and undermines the historical and artistic integrity of our country. Jurisprudence, in this sense, plays a crucial role in ensuring that the legislator's intentions are fully applied and that justice is effective.

Conclusions

The judgment of the Court of Cassation no. 27673 of 2025 represents an important piece in the mosaic of criminal protection of cultural heritage. By reaffirming the principle of normative continuity between Article 178 of Legislative Decree no. 42/2004 and the new Article 518-quaterdecies of the Penal Code, the Supreme Court has provided a guarantee of legal certainty and effectiveness in the repression of acts of counterfeiting works of art. This decision underscores the constant attention of our legal system towards the safeguarding of a precious asset such as cultural heritage, confirming that legislative changes cannot and must not create safe havens for those who intend to violate the law and deface our history and art. For effective defense in these delicate areas, it is always advisable to rely on legal professionals specialized in criminal law and cultural heritage matters.