Commentary on Judgment No. 50237 of 2023: Illiteracy and Knowledge of Proceedings

Judgment No. 50237 of October 12, 2023, filed on December 15, 2023, offers important food for thought regarding the rescission of a judgment in cases of blameless ignorance of proceedings. In particular, it highlights how the defendant's illiteracy cannot be considered a legitimate reason to justify the lack of knowledge of the pending proceedings.

The Legal Context of the Judgment

The case examined by the Court of Cassation concerns D. P. M. B., who, despite having received notification of significant procedural acts, claimed not to have understood their content due to his illiteracy. The Court, however, rejected this argument, stating that the notification had been carried out correctly and, therefore, the defendant could not be considered blameless.

The applicable regulations, prior to the Cartabia reform, establish that the mere existence of a valid notification implies that the defendant must be aware of the pending proceedings. This principle is consistent with the provisions of the New Code of Criminal Procedure, particularly Articles 629 bis and 178.

Analysis of the Judgment's Headnote

Rescission of judgment - Blameless knowledge of proceedings - Illiteracy - Relevance - Exclusion - Case Law. In the matter of rescission of judgment - under the regulations prior to the so-called Cartabia reform - when notification to the defendant of acts from which the pendency of proceedings could be inferred has been ascertained (in this case, notice pursuant to art. 415-bis of the Code of Criminal Procedure and minutes of the adjournment of the trial hearing), it is irrelevant that the defendant did not understand the content due to illiteracy, as in such a case the lack of knowledge of the proceedings cannot be considered blameless.

This headnote clearly highlights that, in the presence of a valid notification, the defendant has the burden of ascertaining their procedural status, regardless of their comprehension abilities. The Court, therefore, establishes a principle of personal responsibility, according to which ignorance cannot be invoked as an excuse if the pendency of the proceedings has been duly communicated.

Conclusions

Judgment No. 50237 of 2023 represents an important confirmation of the need to ensure that all parties in criminal proceedings, regardless of their personal circumstances, are adequately informed about their legal position. It invites reflection on the delicate balance between individual rights and the duty of knowledge, emphasizing that illiteracy, while a condition to be considered with sensitivity, must not become an alibi to evade procedural responsibilities.