This work focuses on the scope of the extension of the review by the Constitutional Court, particularly in relation to criminal issues. Following of the two typologies of sentences that the Constitutional Court pronunce, our attention will focus on the path that the law has been taking regarding the matter which in Italian is called “norme penali di favore”, that means those rules which esclude a certain class of persons or behaviour from the scope of another standard generally more severe. This area is well placed to become a prominent research ground. Indeed, over the last years we have seen a considerable extension of the review by the Court which culminated with the admissibility of constitutional issues concerning “norme penali di favore”. This theme is, in particular, addressed not only from the perspective of the national standards law, but also from the perspective of the European Union law. After acknowledging the need to put the two legal systems in relation between each other, national and Community attention focused on the role of national courts on criminal antinomies, on the assumption that enforcement of a national standard for the Community framework, taking as a concrete example two recent events that have drawn the attention of the doctrine and the jurisprudence such as “false accounting” and the concept of “waste”. Based on the analysis of the events of case law, we try to redifine the boundaries of the review by the Constitutional Court, with the objective of looking for possible ways to expand the same in order to reduce the “free zones” outside its reach.
SINDACATO DI COSTITUZIONALITA' E NORME PENALI DI FAVORE: EVOLUZIONE E PROSPETTIVE
GAZZETTA, Elisa
2012
Abstract
This work focuses on the scope of the extension of the review by the Constitutional Court, particularly in relation to criminal issues. Following of the two typologies of sentences that the Constitutional Court pronunce, our attention will focus on the path that the law has been taking regarding the matter which in Italian is called “norme penali di favore”, that means those rules which esclude a certain class of persons or behaviour from the scope of another standard generally more severe. This area is well placed to become a prominent research ground. Indeed, over the last years we have seen a considerable extension of the review by the Court which culminated with the admissibility of constitutional issues concerning “norme penali di favore”. This theme is, in particular, addressed not only from the perspective of the national standards law, but also from the perspective of the European Union law. After acknowledging the need to put the two legal systems in relation between each other, national and Community attention focused on the role of national courts on criminal antinomies, on the assumption that enforcement of a national standard for the Community framework, taking as a concrete example two recent events that have drawn the attention of the doctrine and the jurisprudence such as “false accounting” and the concept of “waste”. Based on the analysis of the events of case law, we try to redifine the boundaries of the review by the Constitutional Court, with the objective of looking for possible ways to expand the same in order to reduce the “free zones” outside its reach.| File | Dimensione | Formato | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
sindacato di costituzionalità e norme penali di favore.pdf
accesso solo da BNCF e BNCR
Licenza:
Tutti i diritti riservati
Dimensione
1.5 MB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
1.5 MB | Adobe PDF |
I documenti in UNITESI sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14242/180362
URN:NBN:IT:UNIVR-180362