Analysis of Judgment No. 3087 of 2024: Nullity and Interrogation in Criminal Proceedings

Judgment No. 3087 of October 30, 2024, published on January 27, 2025, provides important clarifications regarding the nullity of the request for committal for trial following an interrogation not conducted in accordance with current regulations. This ruling by the Court of Cassation is part of a continuously evolving legal context, where adaptation to new communication methods in criminal proceedings plays a crucial role.

The Case and the Regulatory Context

In the case at hand, the suspect had submitted a request for interrogation through impermissible methods, specifically via PEC (certified email), instead of through the filing on the telematic process portal (PPT), as required by the transitional provisions of art. 87, paragraph 6-bis, Legislative Decree of October 10, 2022, n. 150. This irregularity led to the declaration of nullity of the request for committal for trial.

The Court clarified that such a declaration of nullity cannot be considered abnormal, as the regression of the proceedings does not lead to a standstill of the process itself. In fact, the public prosecutor has the possibility to reconsider the exercise of criminal action once the interrogation has been conducted in accordance with the law.

Legal Principles Underlying the Judgment

Art. 415-bis Code of Criminal Procedure - Request for interrogation submitted by the suspect through impermissible methods - Declaration of nullity of the request for committal for trial due to failure to conduct interrogation - Abnormality - Exclusion - Reasons - Factual situation. The declaration of nullity of the request for committal for trial due to failure to conduct an interrogation requested through impermissible methods is not abnormal, given that the consequent regression of the proceedings does not entail any standstill, as the public prosecutor can reassess their decisions on the exercise of criminal action following the ordered interrogation. (Factual situation in which the interrogation had been requested by the suspect via PEC instead of through filing on the telematic process portal (PPT), as provided for by the transitional provisions of art. 87, paragraph 6-bis, Legislative Decree of October 10, 2022, n. 150, in relation to art. 111-bis Code of Criminal Procedure).

This maxim highlights the importance of following the procedures established by the legislator to ensure the proper conduct of the proceedings. The Court has therefore confirmed the centrality of communication methods in criminal proceedings and the importance of their observance to guarantee fundamental rights, such as the right to defense.

Conclusions

In conclusion, judgment No. 3087 of 2024 represents an important precedent for future applications of criminal procedural law. It underscores the importance of following regulatory provisions concerning the methods of submitting requests and respecting procedures, without which the process risks losing effectiveness and justice. It is essential for legal professionals and suspects to scrupulously adhere to current regulations to avoid situations of nullity that could compromise the entire criminal proceeding.