Judgment No. 46979 of 2024: Lessons on Personal Injury and Aggravating Circumstances

Judgment No. 46979 of 2024 by the Court of Cassation offers important insights into the application of aggravating circumstances in the context of intentional personal injury. In particular, the Court addressed the issue of factual contestation of such aggravating circumstances, clarifying some fundamental aspects for the protection of victims of violence and stalking.

The Legal Context of the Judgment

Regarding the case in question, the Court confirmed the legitimacy of contesting the aggravating circumstance provided for by art. 576, paragraph 1, no. 5.1 of the criminal code. This provision applies when the crime of personal injury is committed by an perpetrator of stalking against the same victim. The Court emphasized that, for the application of this aggravating circumstance, an evaluative element is not necessary, but the ascertainment of the identity between the perpetrator of the crime and the victim is sufficient.

Analysis of the Judgment's Headnote

Aggravating circumstance provided for by art. 576, paragraph 1, no. 5.1, criminal code - Factual contestation - Admissibility - Reasons - Case. In matters of intentional injury, the factual contestation of the aggravating circumstance provided for by art. 576, paragraph 1, no. 5.1, criminal code is legitimate when the crime is committed by the perpetrator of stalking against the same victim, as it is an aggravating circumstance that does not present any evaluative element because, for its configuration, the ascertainment of the objective fact of the identity of the perpetrator of the crimes and the victim is sufficient. (In this case, the Court found the challenged decision to be free from censure, which deemed the crime of personal injury, aggravated by the aforementioned circumstance, prosecutable ex officio even if not explicitly contested, as, from the joint reading of the charges, it emerged that the act was committed by the perpetrator of the crime of stalking against the same victim).

This headnote highlights a crucial principle: the contestation of aggravating circumstances can occur even in the absence of a specific mention, provided that the link between the perpetrator of the crime and the victim is clear. This interpretation aligns with the need to protect victims of violence, ensuring that the legal system can intervene effectively in situations of repeated aggression.

Practical Implications of the Judgment

The decision of the Court of Cassation emphasizes the need for greater attention from legal operators in evaluating cases of personal injury, especially when preceded by stalking. The practical implications of this judgment can be summarized in the following points:

• Clarity in ascertaining the identity between perpetrator and victim.
• Admissibility of factual contestation of aggravating circumstances without the need for their explicit mention.
• Greater protection for victims of stalking through the application of aggravating circumstances.

Conclusions

In summary, judgment no. 46979 of 2024 represents an important step forward in the protection of victims of violence, confirming the legitimacy of contesting aggravating circumstances in a pragmatic and direct manner. This approach not only facilitates criminal prosecution but also sends a strong signal against gender-based violence and stalking dynamics. Jurisprudence continues to evolve, and with it, the methods of protecting vulnerable individuals within our legal system.