Commentary on Judgment No. 2974 of 2025: Enforcement and Judge's Competences

Judgment No. 2974 of January 7, 2025, by the Court of Appeal of Rome represents an important intervention in the field of criminal enforcement, with particular reference to the powers of the presiding judge. The Court annulled without referral a decree issued in an enforcement proceeding, emphasizing the limits of the orders that the presiding judge can issue "de plano". This article aims to analyze the key points of the judgment, providing a clear overview of the legal implications.

Powers of the Presiding Judge

According to the judgment under review, the presiding judge can issue "de plano" decisions only in specific circumstances, as established by Article 666, paragraph 2, of the Code of Criminal Procedure. This means that they do not have the power to decline jurisdiction for the hearing of a case, ordering the transmission of the case files to another judicial authority. This limitation is fundamental to ensuring legal certainty and the proper conduct of criminal proceedings.

The Ruling's Maxim

Orders Issuable "de plano" by the Presiding Judge - Indication - Decree Declining Jurisdiction - Exclusion - Consequences. In matters of enforcement, the presiding judge may issue "de plano" orders only in the cases provided for by Article 666, paragraph 2, of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, a decree by which the presiding judge has declined jurisdiction, ordering the transmission of the case files to another judicial authority, is null and void pursuant to Article 178, paragraph 1, letter a), of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

This maxim clearly highlights that every decision by the presiding judge must fall within the limits established by law. The nullity of the decree in question, pursuant to Article 178, paragraph 1, letter a), of the Code of Criminal Procedure, underscores the importance of respecting the procedures provided for by the regulations, thus avoiding arbitrary decisions that could compromise the rights of the defendants.

Implications and Conclusions

Judgment No. 2974 of 2025, in addition to clarifying the powers of the presiding judge, offers food for thought on the principles of legality and respect for procedural guarantees. It is essential that every judicial operation complies with current regulations to ensure the proper functioning of justice. The Court, with this intervention, acts to protect the rights of the defendants, strengthening trust in the legal system.