Commentary on Judgment No. 16468 of 2024: Defects in Motivation for DASPO

Judgment No. 16468 of 2024, issued by the Court of Cassation, offers significant food for thought regarding the police commissioner's order imposing the obligation to report to the Public Security Authority, known as DASPO. This ruling, which quashes and remands the order of the judge for preliminary investigations, highlights the centrality of motivation in restrictive measures concerning personal liberty, especially in the context of sporting events.

Regulatory Context and the Function of DASPO

DASPO is a preventive measure adopted to combat violence during sporting events. Pursuant to Article 6 of Law December 13, 1989, No. 401, the police commissioner may adopt such a measure in the presence of specific conditions aimed at ensuring public safety. However, validation by the judge for preliminary investigations is essential to ensure that such a measure respects the fundamental rights of individuals.

• Legitimizing prerequisites for the measure
• Importance of motivation
• Possible consequences in case of defects

Defects in Motivation and Their Implications

Order of the police commissioner imposing the obligation to report to the Public Security Authority (so-called DASPO) - Validation by the judge for preliminary investigations - Defect in motivation - Quashing and remand - Reasons. Regarding measures aimed at preventing phenomena of violence during sporting events, the order of the judge for preliminary investigations validating the police commissioner's measure pursuant to Article 6 of Law December 13, 1989, No. 401, issued in the presence of the legitimizing prerequisites for its adoption, but affected by a defect in motivation, must be quashed and remanded. (In its reasoning, the Court specified that, as the validation also operates on the effects of the validated provisional act and determines its consolidation, the mere quashing and remand ensures the temporary paralysis, pending the definition of the rescissory proceeding, of the legal title's effectiveness, which justifies personal liberty).

The Court emphasized that, although the police commissioner's order was legitimate in its prerequisites, the lack of adequate motivation leads to its quashing and remand. This aspect is crucial, as it ensures that restrictive measures are always supported by adequate justification, protecting citizens' rights and their personal liberty.

Conclusions

Judgment No. 16468 of 2024 represents an important reference point in the jurisprudence concerning DASPO and preventive measures in the sports context. It reaffirms the need for clear and detailed motivation in orders that restrict personal liberty. Only in this way can fairness and justice be ensured, preventing measures, however legitimate in their prerequisites, from becoming ineffective or even detrimental to citizens' rights. In conclusion, the ruling of the Court of Cassation reminds us that form and substance must always go hand in hand in compliance with legality and fundamental rights.