Internal and International Corruption
This subject, whence the name of this paper originates from, must be addressed with courage and intellectual integrity by all of us, the different parts of the civil society, the public institutions, the entrepreneurs and the legal professionals, the youth and the new generations.
All the public policies of the European governments share the belief of a direct correlation between the criminal density connected to corruption of States political and economic protagonists and the lack of availability of investments on young talents, new generations, both in the entrepreneurial and in the professional fields. In most Member States, anticorruption policies have gained an increased prominence in government agendas and the financial crisis has drawn attention to the integrity and accountability of policy-makers.
Most Member States that are currently in serious financial difficulties have acknowledged the seriousness of issues related to corruption and have created (or are planning) anticorruption programs in order to deal with the risks deriving from this issue and with the diversion of public funds. In some Member States, the economic adjustment programs provide for explicit obligations related to anti-corruption policies. Even when not formally connected to adjustment programs, anticorruption policies complement the adjustment measures, especially in those countries in which corruption is a serious issue.
During the European Semester of economic policy coordination, recommendations for efficiently fighting corruption have been laid out; Among the most vulnerable sectors, urban development and building projects are certainly very exposed to corruption risks and to infiltration of internal and transnational organized crime.
Alesci, La Procura europea per i reati lesivi d interessi finanziari: la proposta di regolamento tra luci ed ombre, in Arch. pen., 2014, 149;
Antinucci, Le investigazioni del difensore, in Gaito (edited) Procedura penale, Milan, 2013, 323.
Antinucci, L’attuazione della direttiva europea sul diritto alla traduzione: verso la tutela sostanziale del diritto alla difesa effettiva, in Cultura penale e spirito europeo, in Arch. Pen., no. 1/14.
Antinucci, Osservazioni a prima lettura sulla Direttiva 2014/42/UE relativa al congelamento e alla confisca dei beni strumentali e dei proventi da reato nell’Unione europea, in Cultura penale e spirito europeo, in Arch. Pen., no. 2/14.
Antinucci, Contraddittorio e dosimetria della pena: davvero possibile un’equazione algebrica?, in Giur. It., 2012, 3213.
Antinucci, La controversa tutela della libertà dell’estradando, in Giur. it., 2013, 577 .
Antinucci, Il procedimento di distruzione delle merci illegali o contraffatte, Pisa, 2014, 290
Antinucci, Gaito, Prescrizione, terzo estraneo e confisca dei beni archeologici (a margine della vicenda dell’Atleta Vittorioso di Lisippo), in Bargi, Cisterna (edited), La giustizia patrimoniale penale, Torino, II, 2011, 1199;
Antolisei, I reati e gli illeciti amministrativi, societari e bancari, i reati di lavoro e previdenza, la responsabilità degli enti, Milano, 2007, p. 898.
Bargi, “Processo al patrimonio” e principi del giusto processo: regole probatorie e regole decisorie nella confisca penale in BARGI-CISTERNA (edited), La giustizia patrimoniale penale, Torino, I, 2011, 3.
Bassi, Epidendio, Enti e responsabilità da reato: accertamento, sanzioni e misure cautelari, Milano, 2006, p. 301.
Bruxelles, 3 February 2014, COM (2014) 38.
Colangelo A. J., Double Jeopardy and Multiple Sovereigns: A Jurisdictional Theory, in Wash. U. Law Review, 2009, p.769.
Compagna, Obbligatorietà della confisca di valore e profili di discrezionalità nell’eventuale sequestro: il necessario contemperamento degli interessi costituzionali in gioco e l’ipotesi di fallimento, in Court of Cassation, 2009, 3037.
Fondaroli, Le ipotesi speciali di confisca nel sistema penale, Bologna, 2007, p. 5 et seq..
Fiorella, La Legge Anticorruzione alla luce della sentenza delle Sezioni Unite, Roma, Aula Occorsio, 16 April 2014.
Gaito, Furfaro, Il procedimento penale amministrativo, in Procedura penale, edited by Gaito, Milano, 2013, p. 1486.
Gaito, Premesse conoscitive per l’approfondimento dei problemi della nuova giustizia penale patrimoniale, in www.foroeuropa.it, 13.
Mantovani, Raccomandazioni del gruppo di lavoro del B20 sulla anticorruzione e trasparenza, in Dir. comm. int., 3/2012, p.671
Pistorelli, La confisca dei proventi della corruzione nelle convenzioni internazionali e nel diritto dell’Unione Europeo, in Bonelli – Mantovani (edited) Corruzione nazionale e internazionale, Milan, 2014, p.189.
Ranaldi, Processo de societate, confisca del prezzo o del profitto del reato e teoria dei contolimiti: i compiti del curatore fallimentare, in Arch. Pen., 2014, 1, p. 295
Santoriello, Confisca per equivalente e reati tributari. Le prime indicazioni della giurisprudenza, in Il Fisco, 2009, 234;
Sarravalle, Corruzione internazionale e “ne bis in diem”, in Bonelli-Mantovani (edited) Corruzione nazionale ed internazionale, Milano, 2014 p.208.
Vitale, Le Sezioni unite sulla confisca per equivalente. Reati tributari e 231: una questione ancora irrisolta, in Oss. Archivio Penale 2014.
OECD, Convention on combating bribery of foreign public officials in the international business transactions, 21 November 1997.
Other Legal Documents
Article 6 letter (a) of the Decision othe EU Council 2002/187/JHA cited.
Article 50 of Law 7 July 2009, no. 88 entitled «Provisions for obligations deriving from Italy's membership to the European Communities (Community Law 2008)» granted authority to the Government for implementing a legislative decree containing the regulations required by the aforementioned Framework Decision. This Delegation expired on 7 December 2010 without being exercised. During the 17th Legislature, a draft bill has been presented on 21 March 2013, entitled «Delegation to the Government for transposing Framework Decision 2006/783/JHA of the Council, of 6 October 2006, regarding the implementation of the principle of mutual recognition to confiscation orders».
Article 30 of Law 25 February 2008, no. 34 entitled «Provisions for obligations deriving from Italy's membership to the European Communities (Community Law 2007)» granted authority to the Government for implementing a legislative decree containing the regulations required by the aforementioned Framework Decision. This Delegation expired on 21 March 2009 without being exercised.
Cf. Council Decision 2008/801/EC, of 25 September 2008, concerning the conclusion of the UN Convention against Corruption, on behalf of the European Community [Official Journal L 287 of 29.10.2008].
Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement of 14 June 1985, between the Governments of the States of the Benelux Economic Union, the Federal Republic of Germany and the French Republic on the gradual abolition of checks at their common borders, in EUOJ, 22 September 200, L.239/19
Court of Cassation, Division 4, ruling no. 34735, 14 June 2011, Anzillotti et al, in CED no. 324567
Court of Cassation, Division 5, ruling no. 9079 of 24 January 2013, Di Nardo et al., in CED no. 254162
Court of Cassation, Division 5, ruling no. 9883 of 15 October 2013, Terenghi, in CED no. 288521
Court of Cassation, Division 6, no.19189, 11 January 2013, Abruzzese et al., in CED no. 255073.
Court of Cassation, Division 6, no. 13452, 13 January 2014, Menna, in CED no. 152236.
Court of Cassation, Division 6, no. 15904, 12 March 2014, Capograssi, in CED no. 221345.Court of Cassation, Joint Chamber, 29 May 2014 (filed 29 July 2014), no. 33451, President Judge Santacroce, Judge Rapporteur Zampetti, Defendant Repac
Court of Cassation - Division 6, 24 January 2014, Ilva S.p.a, in CED 345612
Court of Cassation, Division 5, 5 December 2013, Patroni Griffi.
Court of Cassation - Joint Chambers , no.19051, 10 January 2013, Company in receivership Tecno Hospital S.r.l., in Giur. It., 2013, p.1253
Court of Cassation - Joint Chambers , no. 41936, 25 October 2005, Muci, in Criminal Cassation 2006, p.1382
Directive 2014/42/EU of European Parliament and Council of 3 April 2014 concerning freezing and confiscation of capital goods and proceeds from crime in the European Union, in OJ, 29.04.2014, L 127/39.
European Parliament legislative resolution of 25 February 2014 on the directive proposal of European Parliament and Council regarding freezing and confiscation of proceeds from crime in the European Union.
Framework Decision 2001/500/JHA of the Council, of 26 June 2001, concerning money laundering and the identification, tracing, freezing or seizing and confiscation of the instrumentalities and the proceeds from crime (OJ L 182 of 5.7.2001, p. 1).
Framework Decision 2003/577/JHA of the Council, of 22 July 2003, concerning the execution in the European Union of orders freezing property or evidence (OJ L 196 of 2.8.2003, p. 45).
Framework Decision 2005/212/JHA of the Council, of 24 February 2005, concerning the confiscation of assets, instruments and proceeds of crime (OJ L 68 of 15.3.2005, p. 49).
Framework Decision 2006/783/JHA of the Council, of 6 October 2006, concerning the execution of the principle of mutual recognition of decisions in confiscation (OJ L 328 of 24.11.2006, p. 59).
Joint Action 98/699/JHA of 3 December 1998 on money laundering and the identification, tracing, freezing, seizing and confiscation of the instrumentalities and the proceeds from crime adopted by the Council on the basis of Article K.3 of the Treaty on European Union (OJ L 333 of 9.12.1998, p. 1)
Law 6 November 2012, no. 190, Provisions for prevention and suppression of illegality in public administration, in Official Journal of 13 November 2012 no. 265. Pursuant to article 6 of the United Nations Convention against Corruption, adopted by the UN General Assembly on 31 October 2003 and ratified under the Law 3 August 2009, no. 116, and articles 20 and 21 of the Criminal Law Convention on Corruption, signed in Strasbourg on 27 January 1999 and ratified under Law 28 June 2012, no. 110. On a national level, the law amendment creates the National Anti-Corruption Authority and other entities responsible for carrying out controls, prevention and fight against corruption and illegality in public administrations, in the most coordinated way as possible.
Law 28 April 2014, no.67, Delegations to the Government concerning custodial sentences not entailing imprisonment and reform of sanction system. Provisions on suspension of prosecution with probation and against untraceable persons, in OJ no.100 of 2 May 2014.
Law 11 August 114, no. 117, Conversion into law of Legislative Decree 92/2014, Urgent provisions concerning compensation in favor of detainees, the remand in custody and further actions regarding prison, in OJ 20 August 2014.
Legislative decree 8 June 2001, no. 231, Regulation of the administrative liability of legal persons, companies and associations even without legal personality, pursuant art. 11 of Law 29 September 2000, no.300. Recently, on the subject of corruption in criminal law cf. Fiorella, La Legge Anticorruzione alla luce della sentenza delle Sezioni Unite, Roma, Aula Occorsio, 16 April 2014.
Report of the Flick Committee to the Board of Directors of Finmeccanica Spa of 31 March 2014.
Report of the Office for Abstracts of the Court of Cassation of 8 May 2014, “Considerazioni sul principio del ne bis in idem nella recente giurisprudenza europea: la sentenza 4 marzo 2014, Grande Stevens e altri c. Italia”.
Resolution of European Parliament on 22 May 2012 on an EU approach on criminal law (2012/2013), in EUOJ of 13 September 2013, C264 E/7, which acknowledges at article 4 the importance of the principles governing criminal law, such as “the principle of ne bis in idem: which means that a person who has been convicted or acquitted by a final judgment in one Member State cannot be prosecuted or punished for the same matter in criminal proceedings in another Member State”.
Metrics powered by PLOS ALM
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2016 Dr.Sc. Mario Antinucci
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.