Judgment No. 48749 of 2023: Defamation and the Right to Defense

The recent Judgment No. 48749 of the Court of Cassation, filed on December 6, 2023, offers an important reflection on a sensitive issue: the intersection between the right to defense and defamation. The subject of the ruling concerns defamatory statements made by the suspect during interrogation and their non-excusability under Article 51 of the Criminal Code.

Legal Context

In particular, the Court established that accusatory statements made by the suspect against third parties, while aware of their innocence, cannot benefit from the justification provided for the exercise of the right to defense. This decision is based on a strict interpretation of the law, emphasizing that the crime of defamation is not among those for which the cause of exclusion of culpability operates, pursuant to Article 384, paragraph one, of the Criminal Code.

Defamatory statements made by the suspect - Exercise of the right to defense - Justification under Art. 51 of the Criminal Code - Applicability - Exclusion - Reasons. Accusatory statements made by the suspect, during interrogation, against third parties, with awareness of their innocence, are not justified by the exercise of the right to defense, pursuant to Art. 51 of the Criminal Code. (In its reasoning, the Court specified that the exclusion of the crime of defamation from the list of those for which the cause of exclusion of culpability under Art. 384, paragraph one, of the Criminal Code operates, implies that defense carried out through defamatory accusations does not exclude, 'a fortiori', the unlawfulness of the conduct).

Implications of the Judgment

This ruling by the Court of Cassation could have significant repercussions in legal practice, particularly concerning the defense of defendants. Here are some key points to consider:

• Defamation as a serious offense: Defamatory statements are not only morally reprehensible but also criminally prosecutable.
• The right to defense has limits: While fundamental in criminal proceedings, it does not justify unfounded accusations against third parties.
• Need for prudence: Lawyers must be aware of the legal consequences arising from statements that could be interpreted as defamatory.

Conclusions

Judgment No. 48749 of 2023 clearly clarifies that the exercise of the right to defense cannot be used as a shield to justify defamatory behavior. This interpretation of the law reinforces the importance of ethical and responsible defense, which respects the rights of others and does not translate into unfounded attacks. The hope is that this ruling will serve as a deterrent for future similar conduct and promote a conscious use of the right to defense in compliance with the norms and principles of justice.