Home Burglary: Ex Officio Prosecution is Constitutionally Legitimate. Supreme Court Ruling No. 22018/2025

Home burglary is not merely a violation of property, but a profound assault on personal privacy and security. The Supreme Court Ruling No. 22018 of 2025 addresses a crucial issue: the constitutional legitimacy of ex officio prosecution for this crime. This decision strengthens the protection of the domestic environment, considered a "sanctuary" for individuals. Let's examine the reasoning.

The Context and the Constitutional Issue

The crime of home burglary (Article 624-bis of the Italian Penal Code) carries severe penalties and is subject to ex officio prosecution, meaning the State prosecutes the offense regardless of a formal complaint. This choice, reiterated by Law No. 134 of 2021, was challenged with reference to Article 3 of the Constitution (equality and reasonableness). Doubts were raised as to whether such prosecution was unreasonable for a crime with a property component.

The Supreme Court's Ruling: Privacy is Inviolable

The Supreme Court, with Ruling No. 22018 of 2025 (President R. P., Rapporteur R. G.), rejected the objection, stating:

The question of the constitutional legitimacy of the combined provisions of Article 1, paragraph 15, of Law No. 134 of 2021 and Article 624-bis of the Penal Code, in reference to Article 3 of the Constitution, concerning the ex officio prosecution of the crime of home burglary, is manifestly unfounded. (In its reasoning, the Court clarified that the legislator's choice to grant enhanced protection to aggressive conduct that is not merely patrimonial, but also affects the privacy of the individual within their home, endangering it, is not unreasonable).

This ruling is fundamental. The Supreme Court has declared the full constitutional conformity of ex officio prosecution for home burglary. The Court clarified that there is no unreasonableness in this choice, as home burglary transcends mere economic damage. It is conduct that violates the most intimate sphere of the individual: their home. The violation of domicile (Article 14 of the Constitution) generates a profound sense of insecurity and danger, justifying stronger criminal protection and ex officio prosecution. The home is recognized as an essential place for the full expression of personality.

Why Enhanced Protection?

The Court's decision is based on solid reasoning:

• **Violation of Privacy:** It affects the private and personal sphere, the domestic "sanctuary."
• **Psychological Impact:** It generates a deep sense of insecurity and vulnerability.
• **Potential Danger:** It can escalate into more serious crimes.
• **Public Interest:** The protection of the home and security is a primary collective value.

This is consistent with previous case law (United Sections No. 31345 of 2017).

Conclusions

Supreme Court Ruling No. 22018 of 2025 reiterates a core principle: the home is inviolable, and its protection is a primary value. Ex officio prosecution for home burglary is a reasonable and constitutionally legitimate legislative choice. It ensures robust protection for a good that is much more than a set of walls. It reflects the awareness that the violation of domicile is a profound assault on an individual's privacy and security, deserving of the utmost attention and the State's mandatory intervention. For citizens, this means a greater guarantee that those who commit such a crime will be prosecuted, strengthening the sense of justice and protection within their own homes.