Analysis of Judgment No. 51191 of 2023: Timeliness and Nullity in Criminal Proceedings

The recent judgment No. 51191 of October 20, 2023, filed on December 21, 2023, offers fundamental insights into the emergency provisions adopted to address the Covid-19 pandemic, particularly regarding the request for oral discussion of appeals. This case, involving the defendant R. B., is emblematic for understanding the legal implications related to the timeliness of procedural communications and the violation of the adversarial principle.

Regulatory Context

According to Article 23-bis, paragraph 4, of Decree-Law of October 28, 2020, No. 137, converted into law on December 18, 2020, No. 176, the request for oral discussion of an appeal must be submitted within a specific deadline. The Court has established that if such a request is filed during the holiday period and within the fifteen clear days prior to the hearing, it must be considered timely. This clarification is crucial to ensure the right to defense and compliance with procedural timelines, in a context where procedures were simplified due to the health emergency.

The Adversarial Principle

Emergency provisions for combating the Covid-19 pandemic - Request for oral discussion of appeal - Filed during holiday period, respecting the deadline of fifteen clear days before the hearing - Timeliness - Existence - Trial conducted under non-participatory chamber procedure - General nullity with intermediate effect - Existence. In the context of emergency provisions for combating the Covid-19 pandemic, the request for oral discussion of an appeal, submitted pursuant to Article 23-bis, paragraph 4, of Decree-Law of October 28, 2020, No. 137, converted, with amendments, by Law of December 18, 2020, No. 176, must be considered timely if filed during the holiday period, respecting the deadline of fifteen clear days before the hearing. Consequently, if the trial is concluded under a non-participatory chamber procedure, a general nullity with intermediate effect arises due to violation of the adversarial principle, which can be raised through an appeal to the Court of Cassation.

The Court affirmed that, in cases where the trial is conducted under a non-participatory chamber procedure, a general nullity with intermediate effect is generated. This aspect is of fundamental importance, as it highlights how respect for the adversarial principle and the active participation of the parties are essential elements for a fair trial. The nullity, in this case, can be raised through an appeal to the Court of Cassation, representing a means of protection for the parties involved.

Conclusions

Judgment No. 51191 of 2023 not only clarifies the procedures for submitting requests for oral discussion within the emergency provisions but also underscores the importance of the adversarial principle in criminal proceedings. This ruling offers an important opportunity to reflect on the balance between the need for procedural efficiency and the rights of the parties, a topic of particular relevance also in light of the challenges posed by the pandemic. Legal professionals should pay close attention to these provisions, ensuring that the rights of defense are always preserved, even in emergency situations.