Commentary on Judgment Cass. pen., Section VI, no. 35375 of 2024 on harbouring a fugitive
The judgment of the Court of Cassation of September 20, 2024, no. 35375, rules on the delicate issue of harbouring a fugitive, particularly in relation to the defendants' knowledge of the crime for which the fugitive was sought. The Court confirmed the conviction of two individuals, A.A. and B.B., who had assisted C.C., sought for mafia association, in his escape from the authorities.
Context of the judgment
The Court of Appeal of Naples had already convicted the two defendants, arguing that their conduct of logistical and material assistance was aimed at evading the authorities' search. The appellants, however, contested the application of the aggravating circumstance referred to in art. 378, paragraph 2, of the Criminal Code, arguing that there was insufficient evidence to prove their awareness of the fugitive's crime of camorra association.
The appealed judgment correctly applied criminal law, and its reasoning is free from defects that can be reviewed in a court of legitimacy.
The Court's arguments
The Court of Cassation rejected the appeals, stating that it was not necessary to prove that the defendants were aware of C.C.'s specific crime. It is sufficient that they had elements indicating the possibility that the fugitive was sought for a serious crime. The Court highlighted how the confidentiality in communications and the precautions taken by the defendants suggested an implicit awareness of the seriousness of the situation.
Among the reasons given, the Court emphasized:
- The close relational context between the appellants and the fugitive.
- The adoption of precautionary measures by the defendants.
- The cryptic language used in conversations.
Conclusions
In conclusion, judgment no. 35375 of 2024 represents an important precedent in Italian jurisprudence on harbouring a fugitive. It clarifies that mere knowledge of the fugitive's risky situation, combined with a relationship of trust, can be sufficient to constitute the crime. This approach could have significant repercussions on future cases and invites broader reflection on the role of awareness and responsibility in acts of harbouring a fugitive.
