Commentary on Judgment No. 24964 of 2023: The Precedence of a Conviction Judgment

The recent judgment No. 24964 of May 5, 2023, by the Court of Cassation offers an important reflection on the principle of ne bis in idem and the conflict between conviction judgments and acquittals due to the statute of limitations. This decision is part of a complex legal context, where the coexistence of multiple judgments can generate uncertainties and interpretative conflicts.

The Principle of Ne Bis In Idem

The principle of ne bis in idem, enshrined in Article 649 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, establishes that a person cannot be tried twice for the same act. However, the judgment under review clarifies how this principle must be applied in the presence of conviction judgments and judgments declaring the statute of limitations. Specifically, the Court held that when a conviction judgment has become final, it prevails over a subsequent acquittal judgment declaring the extinction of the crime due to the statute of limitations.

• Conviction judgment: it is final and precludes the application of the extinction cause.
• Acquittal judgment due to statute of limitations: issued after the conviction has become final, it cannot affect the res judicata.

Reasons for the Precedence of the Conviction Judgment

The Court based its decision on the principle of the consummation of the power to exercise criminal action. Essentially, once a conviction judgment has been issued, the judicial authority's power to prosecute the crime is exhausted. This implies that a subsequent declaration of the statute of limitations, while a cause for the extinction of the crime, cannot affect a judgment that has already become final.

NE BIS IN IDEM - Proceedings concluded with a conviction judgment - Subsequent judgment declaring the extinction of the same crime due to the statute of limitations - Precedence of the conviction judgment - Reasons. In matters of execution, the conflict of judgments determined by the coexistence, against the same subject and for the same act, of a conviction judgment and an acquittal judgment that declared the statute of limitations for the crime, which occurred after the first decision became final, must be resolved with the precedence of the conviction judgment, whose finality precludes the formation of the extinction cause based on the principle of the consummation of the power to exercise criminal action.

Conclusions

In conclusion, judgment No. 24964 of 2023 represents an important clarification regarding conflicts of judgments in criminal law. It reaffirms the centrality of the conviction judgment and establishes clear rules for managing situations where different judicial decisions overlap. Legal practitioners and professionals in the field must consider these principles for the correct interpretation and application of the law, ensuring legal certainty and the protection of defendants' rights.