Aggravated Pimping: Cassation Court 9231/2024 Clarifies Absence of Necessary Coercion for Exploitation of Multiple Persons

The Italian legal landscape is constantly evolving, especially when it comes to crimes affecting public morality and good customs. The recent ruling no. 9231, filed on March 6, 2025, by the Court of Cassation, presided over by Dr. G. Sarno and reported by Dr. A. Gentili, offers an important interpretation on the application of the aggravating circumstance in the crime of pimping, particularly when the illicit conduct involves "multiple persons". This ruling, which rejected the appeal of the defendant F. P.M. M. V. against the judgment of the Court of Appeal of Naples, clarifies a fundamental aspect that deserves careful analysis by lawyers, legal professionals, and, more generally, anyone interested in the dynamics of criminal justice.

The Regulatory Framework: Pimping and the Special Aggravating Circumstance

The crime of pimping, or aiding and abetting and exploiting prostitution, finds its primary regulation in Law no. 75 of February 20, 1958, known as the Merlin Law, which abolished brothels and increased penalties for those who profit from the prostitution of others. The primary objective of this law is to protect human dignity and public morality, by combating the organization and exploitation of prostitution. Among the various types of offenses provided for, Article 4 lists a series of aggravating circumstances. The judgment in question specifically focuses on the aggravating circumstance referred to in art. 4, no. 7, which applies when the act of pimping is committed "to the detriment of multiple persons". The central issue debated was whether this aggravating circumstance necessarily required that the illicit conduct be carried out through the suppression of the self-determination of the passive subjects, or, if it was necessary for the victims to be forced or deceived into prostitution.

In matters of crimes against public morality and good customs, the special aggravating circumstance of the act of pimping committed "to the detriment of multiple persons", referred to in art. 4, no. 7, Law of February 20, 1958, no. 75, does not require that the illicit conduct be carried out through the suppression of the self-determination of the passive subjects, being applicable even in cases where the latter consent to the practice of prostitution. (Case relating to the advertising, via "internet", of listings concerning prostitution activities carried out by third parties).

The maxim above clearly summarizes the principle affirmed by the Supreme Court. Its meaning is disruptive: the aggravating circumstance does not depend on coercion or deception towards the persons who engage in prostitution. This means that even if the passive subjects freely consent to the practice of prostitution, the conduct of those who facilitate or exploit this activity, involving multiple persons, still constitutes the aggravating circumstance. The Cassation Court, in line with previous orientations (such as ruling no. 2918 of 2021), shifts the focus from the individual will of the prostitute to the conduct of the perpetrator who, by organizing or profiting from the activity of multiple individuals, impacts public morality and creates a system of exploitation. The specific case, relating to the online advertising of listings for prostitution activities carried out by third parties, highlights the relevance of this interpretation in a digital context.

The Cassation Court's Interpretive Turn: Consent and Exploitation

This interpretation by the Court of Cassation is crucial for several reasons. Firstly, it clarifies that the protection of the Merlin Law is not limited to safeguarding the individual freedom of self-determination of persons engaged in prostitution, but extends to the defense of public morality from phenomena of organized exploitation. The fact that the passive subjects consent to the prostitution activity does not eliminate the social and criminal disvalue of the conduct of those who profit from it, especially when this occurs on a large scale, involving "multiple persons".

• Coercion or direct deception towards persons engaged in prostitution is not necessary.
• The aggravating circumstance is established by the involvement of multiple individuals in organized or facilitated prostitution activities.
• The conduct of intermediation, organization, or exploitation is relevant, regardless of the individual's will.
• The online advertising of listings concerning prostitution activities carried out by third parties falls fully within this category.

This approach strengthens deterrence against exploitation networks, even those that operate in less overt ways, masking themselves behind the presumed "consent" of the victims. The aggravating circumstance, in this sense, targets the objective and organizational dimension of the phenomenon, rather than solely the infringement of individual freedom. It is a clear warning to anyone who thinks they can circumvent the law by exploiting the prostitution of others, especially through digital channels that offer new opportunities for such conduct.

Conclusions: A Warning for New Exploitation Scenarios

Ruling no. 9231/2024 by the Cassation Court is part of a jurisprudential path aimed at making the repression of pimping more effective, adapting the normative interpretation to social and technological changes. With this ruling, the Court emphasizes that the aggravating circumstance for acts of pimping committed "to the detriment of multiple persons" is established regardless of a suppression of the self-determination of the passive subjects. This means that the law protects public morality and combats exploitation even when the persons involved consent to prostitution, emphasizing the conduct of the facilitator or exploiter who organizes or profits from a system involving multiple individuals. It is an important step in combating new forms of exploitation, often conveyed through the web, and in reaffirming the firm will of our legal system to protect human dignity and the values of the community.