Commentary on Judgment No. 33019 of 2024: Outrage Against Political, Administrative, or Judicial Bodies

Judgment No. 33019 of July 12, 2024, issued by the Court of Cassation, represents an important ruling on the offense of outrage against political, administrative, or judicial bodies. This decision clarifies that the crime of outrage can be established even in the absence of conduct carried out "in the presence" of authorities, as in the case of email communications addressed to public entities.

Context of the Judgment

In this case, the defendant A. G. sent emails containing serious offenses to members of the Local Police, the Prefecture, and the Municipality. The Court held that such conduct constituted the crime of outrage, even though it was not committed in the presence of the recipients.

Conduct committed by means of writing - Body convened in a college for the exercise of its functions - Necessity - Exclusion - Case. The crime of outrage against a political, administrative, or judicial body, committed by means of writing directed to the body, representation, or college, does not necessarily require that the conduct be carried out "in the presence" of the latter, i.e., while they are exercising their functions. (Case in which the Court correctly found the crime of corporate outrage to have been established in relation to certain "mails," sent to the official "accounts" of the Local Police, Prefecture, and Municipality, containing serious offenses against members of the Local Police).

Legal Implications

The decision establishes a fundamental principle: the crime of outrage is not limited to behaviors directed expressly in front of authorities, but can also manifest through written communications. This aspect is particularly relevant in an era where interactions between citizens and institutions increasingly occur through digital channels.

• Recognition of the importance of written communication in criminal law.
• Possibility of sanctioning offensive behaviors even if they do not occur 'in the presence' of the authority.
• Strengthening the protection of public institutions from attacks and insults.

The Court also referred to the Penal Code, specifically Article 342, paragraph 2, which deals with offenses against public officials, emphasizing how the offensive intent can manifest in forms other than direct encounter.

Conclusions

Judgment No. 33019 of 2024 represents a step forward in Italian jurisprudence on the offense of outrage against public bodies. It clarifies that offense to an institution does not necessarily have to occur in the presence of the competent bodies, but can also be established through writings sent to official channels. This approach broadens the protection of institutions and their members, promoting a climate of respect necessary for the proper functioning of public administration.