Reflections on Judgment Cass. pen., Sec. II, no. 25824/2024: Money Laundering and Self-Money Laundering

Judgment no. 25824/2024 of the Court of Cassation, issued by the Second Criminal Section, offers interesting insights for reflection on the crimes of money laundering and self-money laundering. The case in question featured A.A., convicted of criminal association and self-money laundering, who appealed, contesting various procedural and substantive aspects of the appellate judgment.

Procedural Issues and Right to Defence

One of the focal points of the appeal concerns the non-observance of the formalities provided for by art. 415 bis c.p.p., with the defence arguing that the integration of the indictment should have been preceded by a new notice. The Court, however, ruled that the particular procedural choice did not compromise the right to defence, highlighting that the defendant was fully aware of the facts attributed to him.

The formulation of the request for an alternative procedure implies the crystallization of the charge, demonstrating the defendant's acceptance.

• Recognition of the legality of the modification of the charges.
• Importance of clarity in the charge to guarantee the right to defence.
• Evaluation of defensive choices as an indicator of awareness.

Proof of the Underlying Offence

The Court also addressed the issue of proof of the underlying offence, a crucial aspect in the crime of self-money laundering. It was observed that, although there are different jurisprudential trends, in the specific case, the misappropriations constituting the underlying offence had been identified in detail. This aspect demonstrates the importance of a clear identification of the initial crime for the configuration of the crime of self-money laundering.

The Assessment of Recidivism

A further ground for contestation concerned the assessment of recidivism. The Court held that the decision of the Court of Appeal was congruous, considering the defendant's criminal record and the mitigating circumstances. It is interesting to note how the Court justified the rejection of the requests for mitigation of the sentence, emphasizing the seriousness of the criminal record.

Conclusions

Judgment no. 25824/2024 of the Court of Cassation serves as an important reference for understanding the crimes of money laundering and self-money laundering. It underscores the importance of procedural clarity and proof of the underlying offence, as well as the adequacy of the assessment of recidivism. This decision invites reflection on the need to ensure a fair and transparent trial, respecting the rights of defence and current legislation.