With the permission of Giuffrè publisher Francis Lefebvre we anticipate below the abstracts of papers published in the latest issue of the Italian Journal of Criminal Law and Procedure (No. 1/2026).

 

LEGAL THEORY

ARTICLES

D. Pulitanò, Feminicide, p. 3 ss.

A strong cultural message is inherent in the word femicide and in the express provision of life sentence. Nothing adds to the preceptive message inherent in the prohibition against killing a human being.

 

G. Giostra, The heart-rending cry of prison reality and the deafness of politics, p. 11 ss.

The paper highlights the unacceptable gap between constitutional being and ought to be in the field of the execution of a criminal sentence, as well as the no less unacceptable inertia of political institutions. The latter are instead more inclined to bend constitutional provisions to alleged requirements of public security. Such requirements are further fuelled by an anxiety-inducing rhetoric that renders the securitarian approach highly profitable from an electoral perspective. From this follows the need to engage society at large through a narrative capable of unmasking this distortion of the very terms of the problem. The final part of the paper is briefly devoted to Professor Grevi: the scholar of penitentiary law, the public intellectual, and the man.

 

M. Cassano, The motivation of the provisons as an expression of the responsible exercise of the judges discretion, p. 19 ss.

The obligation to provide reasons for judicial decisions, established by Article 111, paragraph 6, of the Constitution, is not limited to enact structural element and to affirm a precise ethical-professional duty binding upon the judge; rather, it contributes to define the full meaning of other provisions contained within the fundamental Charter: rule of law, exclusive subjection of judges to the law, administration of justice in the name of the Italian people (art. 101), generalized right of appeal to the Court of Cassation against judgements and measures concerning personal freedom (art. 111, comma 7), defence as an inviolable right at every stage and instance of the proceedings, fair trial governed by the principle of adversarial proccedings. In accordance with the constitutional framework, ordinary legislation has been amended over time to strengthen the central importance of arguments that are comprehensive, faithful to the evidence produced, logical in their reasoning, proportionate to the individual issues, and diligent in addressing defence submissions. It is crucial to use a language that, without sacrificing necessary technicalities, fosters the understanding of the content of the ruling, even by those who do not possess specific technical expertise. Legal reasoning acts as a tool of control in subsequent levels of judgment and as a driving factor for a dialogic and circular nomophylaxis, aimed at strengthening the quality of rulings with a view to an increasingly intense protection of the fundamental rights of the person. Furthermore, it serves to prevent subjective and intuitionistic tendencies of the judge – due to an incorrect interpretation of the principle of free evaluation of evidence – and to call the judge to a sense of self-limitation and responsibility in the activity of interpreting legal provisions, which is made increasingly complex by the multi-level system of sources, the polysemy of their content, and the gap between social changes, new demands for justice, and the timing of legislation.

 

S. Larizza, Cesare Beccaria and the Irregularity of Criminal Procedures, p. 37 ss.

The profound innovative spirit of Cesare Beccaria on the subject of crimes and penalties also pervades the subject of the criminal process dominated at that time by the inquisitorial model. Man, respect for his rights is once again the driving force that shatters the cornerstones of that process: the secrecy of the procedure; the lack of protection of human rights; man and his body used as evidence. Formidable is the attack on the system of legal evidence whose evidential value was predetermined by the law and, in particular, to the confession that was reached through the infliction of torments. The presumption of innocence of the suspect assumed as a pole star of a trial on a human scale sets the pace for a new model of trial: the informative one where it is completely supplanted the system of the legal proofs opening spaces to the principle of the free conviction of the judge. Cesare Beccaria, once again anticipating modern reflections, captures the stringent and insurmountable link that exists between criminal law and criminal procedural law which cannot operate in watertight compartments.

 

G. Di Chiara, B.C. Alongi, Gender Stereotypes in Judicial Decision-Making Victimizing Language, Cultural Backgrounds and Cognitive Biases. A Case-Law Based Study, p. 63 ss.

In examining judicial case-law on domestic violence, gender violence and sexual offences, contemporary academic debate increasingly highlights – within an intercultural perspective – the impact that cognitive biases may exert on shaping judicial convinction and, crucially, on the entire structure of judicial motivation. By foregrounding the constitutional role of reason-giving in criminal decisions and drawing on a qualitative analysis of a representative body of judicial decisions, this study investigates the undermining effects of gender stereotypes as they emerge in the evaluation of evidentiary materials and, ultimately, in the narrative construction of judicial decisions.

 

A. Pugiotto, A terrible idea the proposed amendment to article 27, paragraph 3, of the constitution, p. 103 ss.

The essay critically analyses the proposed amendments to Article 27, paragraph 3, of the Constitution, currently under consideration by Parliament, which aim to subordinate the rehabilitative purpose of punishment to other punitive functions. After reconstructing the political and institutional context and the persistent crisis of effectiveness of the re-educational model, the author shows how these proposals affect the axiological structure of the punitive system, altering its constitutional centre of gravity. The analysis highlights the central role attributed by constitutional jurisprudence to Article 27, paragraph 3, as the principle governing the entire cycle of punishment and the parameter for controlling proportionality, automatic sanctions and conditions of detention. The rehabilitative function thus emerges as an inalienable constitutional constraint, closely linked to human dignity. In conclusion, the essay suggests its possible qualification as a supreme principle of the legal system, capable of limiting constitutional revision, referring – in Pasolini’s words – to the guaranteeing role of the President of the Republic and the Constitutional Court.

 

F.S. Cassibba, The circulation of evidence between containment imperatives and the protection of fundamental rights, p. 119 ss.

The paper examines the circulation of evidence in criminal proceedings, highlighting the inadequacy of the current codified framework with regard to adversarial proceedings in the gathering of evidence and the protection of fundamental rights. In particular, it criticises the continuing reliance on the logic of the non-dispersion of evidence and the efficiency-driven expansion of the pre-trial investigation stage. It therefore proposes restricting the circulation of evidence to connected proceedings only, introducing prior judicial scrutiny for seriously intrusive measures, and restoring the primacy of oral evidence.

 

A. Alberico, Mafia-related aggravating circumstances and partecipants crimes the need for a critical reexamination, p. 141 ss.

The issue of “mafia” aggravating circumstances applicability to crimes committed by a member of a criminal organization under Article 416-bis of the Criminal Code had found an authoritative and, in practice, definitive solution thanks to the Cinalli ruling of the Supreme Court. In that judgment, the Supreme Court, in its most authoritative composition, had ruled out any apparent concurrence of norms or bis in idem between the provisions involved, legitimizing the increased penalties even for crimes committed by reason of membership in a criminal organization. That outcome, while consistent with the interpretative choices of the time regarding the interference between criminal provisions, can today be questioned precisely because of the changed approach of legal doctrine and jurisprudence to the issue of concurrence of norms. This paper aims to explore the arguments supporting a rethinking of the position supported in Cinalli, also highlighting the new statutory frameworks envisaged for participatory conduct and the related requirements for proportionate sanctions, even in the face of facts characterised by qualified gravity.

 

M. Di Lello Finuoli, The so-called economic violence between criminalisation demands and the principle of subsidiarity, p. 173 ss.

The essay examines the phenomenon of economic violence against women, analysing its forms of manifestation, its individual and collective consequences, and its relevance in domestic and supranational laws. Through an examination of case law on the offence of mistreatments and a comparative analysis, it reflects on the limits and potential of criminal law and, more broadly, on strategies to counter the economic discrimination of women, concluding in favour of primary prevention and the subsidiarity of criminal law intervention.

 

A. Monti, Compensation for wrongful pre-trial detention under domestic law and the European Convention on Human Rights unresolved issues and gaps in the protection of personal liberty, p. 213 ss.

The article offers a critical analysis of the rules governing compensation for unjust detention in light of the relationship between domestic and conventional law, highlighting the inconsistencies of the current system and the resulting protection gaps. Starting from the notion of judicial error, the study reconstructs the legal framework of unjust detention with the aim of assessing its systematic coherence and its compatibility with constitutional and conventional standards. From this perspective, the article proposes an integrated interpretation of Articles 13 and 24(4) of the Italian Constitution and Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights, outlining a unified and multi-level model for the protection of personal liberty.

 

L. Franzetti, Planned obsolescence at the crossroads of criminal protection of sustainable products a vanguard or a dead end? Reflections from a comparative perspective, p. 241 ss.

The article examines the phenomenon of planned obsolescence as an emblem of the consumer society and a central challenge for the criminal-law protection of the “sustainable” product. After reconstructing the various forms of obsolescence and the corresponding civil and administrative responses, the author analyses the European regulatory framework on sustainability and the most significant case law. The discussion culminates in a comparative assessment of the French model-currently the only system to provide for a specific criminal offence-highlighting its limitations as the expression of a holistic understanding of obsolescence. The analysis concludes by questioning whether recourse to criminal law constitutes a genuine vanguard of protection or rather a dead end in the development of a criminal law of sustainability.

 

CASE LAW

M. Pelissero, Substitute penalties and the regime of absolute preclusion an unconvincing balance between the rehabilitative function and social defense (annotated case: Corte cost., 9 luglio 2025, n. 139), p. 337 ss.

The Constitutional Court, in declaring unfounded the question of constitutional legitimacy relating to the exclusion from the discipline of substitutive penalties for those convicted of offences under Article 4-bis Act 354/1975, consolidates an absolute presumption of social danger, interpreting the principle of proportionality not as a guarantee limit, but as a functional tool for the needs of social defence.

 

V. Manes, Proportionality as an interpretative tool: early applications in Corruption Law (annotated case: Cass. pen., sez. VI, 9 ottobre 2025, n. 40822), p. 354 ss.

This paper discusses a recent decision of the Italian Supreme Court on incitement to bribery, which foregrounds the principle of proportionality as an interpretative tool capable of guiding the identification of punishable conduct at the very level of offence definition. Drawing on Constitutional Court judgment no. 113 of 2025, the decision reaffirms that the subsumption of the facts within the statutory offence must be assessed in light of the degree of wrongdoing expressed by the applicable sentencing range, thereby excluding from the reach of the criminal law conduct that falls short of the threshold of seriousness implicitly required by the sanction. On this basis, a restrictive understanding of the offence takes shape, bringing together proportionality and harm principle in a joint function aimed at curbing expansive readings — especially problematic in the field of offences against public administration. The paper then considers the broader systemic implications of this approach, highlighting its potential in guarantee-oriented terms and its compatibility with the principle of legality, insofar as it operates through a form of “teleological reduction” of the offence, necessary to avoid a “contra constitutionem” outcome. From this perspective, proportionality also stands out as a central interpretative device within a renewed “Strafbegrenzungswissenschaft”, tasked with safeguarding — at the interpretative level as well — the limits of punitive power.

 

DISCUSSIONS: “Artificial Intelligence and Criminal Justice”

S. Quattrocolo, Law 1322025 an ordinary piece of legislation to rule an extraordinary phenomenon, p. 277 ss.

B. Fragasso, Criminal Law and risks arising from artificial intelligence brief remarks on the delegation of legislative powers to the government under law no. 1322025, p. 299 ss.

 

 

G. Forti, Criminal justice between accounting temptation and the exile of memory, p. 321 ss.

Further contributions in the volume of the Review, in addition to the usual reviews of constitutional jurisprudence and supranational criminal justice, include reviews of the following monographs in the Bibliographical Review:

 

T. Alesci, M. Colacurci, F. Lombardi (a cura di), L’interferenza criminale nell’economia. Modelli di prevenzione, Editoriale Scientifica, Napoli, 2025, pp. 434, p. 465 ss. (review of F. Cerqua)

M. Arbotti, La prevenzione patrimoniale non ablativa. Profili dogmatici e limiti costituzionali della prevenzione mite, Giappichelli, Torino, 2026, pp. 452, p. 466 ss. (review of E. Zuffada)

T. Bene, F. Falato, C. Iasevoli, V. Maffeo, B. Nacar, C. Naimoli (a cura di), Scritti in ricordo di Giuseppe Riccio, Giappichelli, Torino, 2025, pp. 640, p. 468 ss. (review of F. Cerqua)

M. Lamanuzzi, C. Mazzucato (a cura di), Violenza contro le donne. Forme visibili e invisibili di un fenomeno globale. Strategie interdisciplinari di prevenzione, Giappichelli, Torino, 2025, pp. 256, p. 470 ss. (review of M. Gandolfi)