Analysis of Judgment No. 30041 of 2024: Refusal of Testing for Drug Use and Criminal Relevance

Judgment No. 30041 of May 23, 2024, issued by the Court of Cassation, offers an important reflection on the contravention provided for by Article 187, paragraph 8, of the Highway Code. This ruling clarifies the conditions under which the refusal to undergo testing for psychophysical impairment due to drug use may not constitute a crime, especially when the person involved in an accident does not receive medical treatment in hospital.

The Regulatory Context

The Highway Code, in Article 187, regulates the ascertainment of the state of psychophysical impairment from drug use. The rule provides for sanctions for those who refuse to undergo such tests, but the judgment in question introduces a new element: the criminal relevance of the refusal is strictly linked to the driver's emergency health situation at the time of the accident.

Contravention referred to in art. 187, paragraph 8, Highway Code - Refusal to undergo testing for psychophysical impairment from drug use by a driver involved in an accident, but not undergoing medical treatment at a hospital - Configurability of the crime - Exclusion - Reasons - Case law. The refusal to undergo testing for impairment due to drug use, by means of biological fluid sampling at a healthcare facility, by the driver of a vehicle who, although involved in a road accident, was not subjected to medical treatment at a hospital, does not constitute the contravention referred to in art. 187, paragraph 8, Highway Code, as such conduct lacks criminal relevance due to the principles of specificity and typicality of criminal provisions. (Case law concerning a driver who, immediately after the accident, received medical treatment from ambulance personnel at the scene of the accident, and subsequently refused, at the request of a second patrol, to go to a hospital to undergo biological fluid sampling for the purpose of ascertaining drug impairment).

Implications of the Judgment

The Court emphasizes the importance of the principles of specificity and typicality, which are fundamental in Italian criminal law. These principles establish that conduct can only be considered a crime if it is expressly provided for by law. In the case in question, the driver's refusal to go to the hospital for biological fluid sampling was deemed not punishable, as his health condition did not justify an accusation of criminal relevance.

Conclusions

This judgment represents a significant precedent for future cases involving the refusal to undergo drug use testing. It clarifies that the criminal relevance of such refusal must be carefully assessed, taking into account the specific circumstances of the case. It is therefore essential that drivers are informed about their rights and the possible legal consequences of their actions, especially in critical situations related to road accidents.