Commentary on Judgment No. 33201 of 2024: Personal Falsehood and Public Trust

The recent judgment of the Court of Cassation No. 33201 of May 21, 2024, has generated considerable interest in the field of criminal law, particularly concerning offenses against public trust. This decision is part of a complex regulatory and jurisprudential framework, clarifying crucial aspects related to false statements about personal qualities and their criminal relevance.

The Regulatory Context and the Ruling's Headnote

The Court of Cassation addressed the case of a defendant, E. D. R., accused of making false statements regarding his clean criminal record. The central issue was whether such conduct could constitute the offense under Article 495 of the Criminal Code, which punishes falsity in documents. The Court referred to the following headnote:

False statements on personal qualities - Declarant not having received the warnings referred to in Article 64, paragraph 3, of the Code of Criminal Procedure - Judgment of the Constitutional Court No. 11 of 2023 - Offense under Article 495, Criminal Code - Existence - Exclusion - Case. In matters of offenses against public trust, following the judgment of the Constitutional Court No. 11 of 2023, the conduct of a defendant who, without having been informed of the warnings referred to in Article 64, paragraph 3, of the Code of Criminal Procedure, makes false statements about their personal qualities listed in Article 21 of the implementing provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, does not constitute the offense under Article 495 of the Criminal Code. (Case where the defendant, before the interrogation, had made false statements regarding his clean criminal record).

Implications of the Judgment

This judgment has significant implications for Italian criminal law, particularly concerning:

• Regulatory Clarity: It establishes that the crime of false declaration cannot be established in the absence of specific warnings, thereby protecting defendants' rights.
• Protection of Individual Rights: It reiterates the importance of proper information to defendants, ensuring they have the opportunity to defend themselves adequately.
• Interaction Between Norms: It illustrates how procedural and substantive norms must interact to ensure a fair trial.

Conclusions

In conclusion, judgment No. 33201 of 2024 represents a step forward in protecting individual rights within the context of offenses against public trust. The Court of Cassation, supported by the ruling of the Constitutional Court, has clarified that legal certainty must prevail, avoiding excessively punitive interpretations in the absence of clear evidence. This approach not only strengthens the principle of legality but also contributes to greater confidence in the criminal justice system, which is fundamental for the proper functioning of the rule of law.