The Supreme Court on Probation Abroad: The Burden of Allegation (Judgment 23720/2025)

In an increasingly globalized legal landscape, citizen mobility and European integration present new challenges, even in the realm of penal execution. The possibility for a convicted person to serve an alternative measure to detention in another European Union Member State is a matter of great importance. The Court of Cassation, with Judgment No. 23720 of 20/06/2025, has provided important clarifications regarding the application of probation to social services in cross-border contexts, emphasizing a fundamental aspect: the burden of allegation on the interested party.

Probation in the European Context

Probation to social services, governed by Article 47 of Law of July 26, 1975, No. 354 (Prison System Law), is an alternative measure to detention that allows the convicted person to serve their sentence outside of prison, under the supervision of social services, to facilitate reintegration. With European integration, Legislative Decree of February 15, 2016, No. 38, implemented Council Framework Decision 2008/947/JHA, facilitating the mutual recognition of alternative measures and allowing the convicted person to benefit from them in their State of habitual or legal residence, even if the conviction was issued in another Member State.

Judgment 23720/2025: The Burden of Allegation as an Essential Condition

The decision of the Court of Cassation, presided over by G. Santalucia and drafted by S. Aprile, ruled on the appeal of the defendant G. L. Sindoni. The central point of the ruling is crystallized in the maxim we report:

In matters of alternative measures to detention, probation to social services can be carried out in the foreign European Union Member State where the convicted person has legal and habitual residence, in accordance with Legislative Decree of February 15, 2016, No. 38, provided that the interested party fulfills their burden of allegation concerning the minimum elements, relevant to their living conditions (in this case, place of residence abroad and work activity carried out there), which allow the endorsement of their request by the supervisory court.

This maxim clarifies that probation abroad is possible, but the convicted person has a specific "burden of allegation." This means they must provide the Supervisory Court with all essential elements demonstrating their actual living conditions in the Member State where they intend to serve the measure. The Court specified that these minimum elements include:

• The exact place of their legal and habitual residence abroad.
• The work activity carried out or to be carried out in that State.
• Any other relevant element that can attest to their social integration.

Without this information, the Supervisory Court cannot adequately assess the request. The ruling emphasizes the importance of active and transparent collaboration from the convicted person, whose request must be supported by concrete and verifiable evidence to ensure the effectiveness of the rehabilitative process.

Conclusions: Transparency for Reintegration

Judgment 23720/2025 of the Court of Cassation offers valuable guidance for the application of alternative measures to detention in a transnational context. By reiterating the possibility of carrying out probation to social services in another European Union Member State, it makes its acceptance conditional on the strict observance of the burden of allegation by the convicted person. This means that European judicial cooperation and the principles of rehabilitation require the diligence of the interested party in demonstrating the concreteness of their life project abroad. This is clear guidance for all operators in the field of prison law and for convicted persons.