Commentary on Judgment No. 45583 of 2024: Substitute Penalties and Conditional Suspension

The recent judgment No. 45583 of December 3, 2024, published by the Court of Cassation, has raised important questions regarding the application of substitute penalties compared to the conditional suspension of the sentence. This decision, which is part of a constantly evolving regulatory framework, offers food for thought for both legal professionals and citizens interested in legal dynamics.

Regulatory Context

The case concerns the defendant F. T., whose actions were examined in relation to the prohibition of granting the benefit of conditional suspension of the sentence, introduced by art. 71 of Legislative Decree no. 150 of 2022. This rule establishes that, in the presence of substitute penalties for short custodial sentences, conditional suspension cannot be granted. However, the Court clarified that this prohibition does not apply to acts committed before the entry into force of the rule, referring to the principle of favour for the defendant.

• Art. 2, paragraph 4, Criminal Code: application of the more favourable rule.
• Art. 545-bis of the Code of Criminal Procedure: relevance of legislative amendments.
• Principle of alternative between substitute penalties and conditional suspension.

Interpretation of the Judgment

Substitute penalties for short custodial sentences - Conditional suspension - Prohibition of granting the benefit introduced by art. 71 Legislative Decree no. 150 of 2022 - Applicability to acts committed before the entry into force of Legislative Decree no. 150 of 2022 - Exclusion - Reasons. Substitute penalties for short custodial sentences - Cumulability with the benefit of conditional suspension of the sentence - Exclusion ex art. 71, paragraph 1, letter i), Legislative Decree no. 150 of 2022 - Art. 545-bis Code of Criminal Procedure as amended by Legislative Decree March 19, 2024, no. 31 - Relevance - Exclusion - Reasons.

The Court of Cassation emphasized that, in cases of succession of criminal laws over time, the rule most favourable to the defendant must be applied. This principle, which is based on art. 2, paragraph 4 of the Criminal Code, guarantees fundamental protection for the rights of defendants, avoiding retroactive application of more severe rules.

Conclusions

Judgment No. 45583 of 2024 represents an important step forward in protecting the rights of defendants, highlighting the need to carefully consider the regulatory context and ongoing legislative changes. The distinction between acts committed before and after the entry into force of the new provisions allows for a fairer and more just treatment, in line with the principles of legality and justice. It is essential that legal operators, as well as citizens, remain updated on these issues to fully understand the implications of legal decisions and evolving norms.