The individual's right to personal freedom is one of the fundamental values enshrined in our Constitutional Charter, as an indefectible principle for any democratic society that can be defined as such. However, it is the Constitution itself that provides for limitations on the freedom of the judicial authority, in the cases and in the ways prescribed by law, through the adoption of restrictive measures on the person, whose purpose is to meet needs that cannot wait for the epilogue of the trial, very often destined to arrive after a long time. In this system includes the institution of re-examination, introduced in 1982 by our legislator, also to comply with our country's international commitments, such as the Cedu and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. This tool allows anyone who is reached by a precautionary precautionary measure, the right to submit to a panel of judges, the whole issue on personal freedom so that the control involves both the merit and the legitimacy of the provision, allowing the accused finally a second-line check on the provision within a reasonable time. Compared to the original layout, however, the review has undergone an evolution of a guaranteed sign, both in the 1930 code and in the current 1988 code, to better satisfy the rights of the parties, in particular those of the private party, to a proceeding that ensures the protection of the individual in all respects. This paper aims to highlight those mechanisms and institutions that, within the various stages of the review process of the coercive measures, allow the accused to reach a decision on his status libertatis as quickly as possible, without sacrificing the right to a technical defense and to a dialectical comparison with the public part, if present, before a third judge.
Il diritto alla libertà personale dell’individuo costituisce uno dei valori fondamentali sanciti dalla nostra Carta Costituzionale, in quanto principio indefettibile per ogni società democratica che possa definirsi tale. Tuttavia, è la stessa Costituzione a prevedere limitazioni della libertà da parte dell’autorità giudiziaria, nei casi e con i modi normativamente previsti, attraverso l’adozione di provvedimenti restrittivi della persona, il cui scopo è quello di far fronte ad esigenze che non possono attendere l’epilogo della vicenda processuale, destinato molto spesso ad arrivare dopo tanto tempo. In questo sistema si inserisce l’istituto del riesame, introdotto nel 1982 dal nostro legislatore, anche per ottemperare agli impegni presi sul piano internazionale dal nostro Paese, come la Cedu e il Patto internazionale sui diritti civili e politici. Tale strumento permette a chiunque venga raggiunto da una misura cautelare coercitiva, il diritto di sottoporre ad un collegio di giudici, l’intera questione sulla libertà personale di modo che il controllo coinvolga sia il merito che la legittimità del provvedimento, consentendo all’imputato finalmente un controllo in seconda battuta sul provvedimento in tempi ragionevoli. Rispetto all’impostazione originaria, tuttavia, il riesame ha subito un’evoluzione di segno garantista, sia nel codice del 1930 che nell’attuale codice del 1988, per meglio soddisfare i diritti delle parti, in particolare quelli della parte privata, ad un procedimento che assicuri la tutela dell’individuo sotto tutti gli aspetti. Tale elaborato si pone l’obiettivo di evidenziare quei meccanismi ed istituti che, all’interno delle varie fasi del procedimento di riesame delle misure coercitive, consentano all’imputato di pervenire alla decisione sul suo status libertatis nel minor tempo possibile, senza sacrificare il diritto ad una difesa tecnica e ad un confronto dialettico con la parte pubblica, se presente, davanti ad un giudice terzo.
Diritto di difesa e garanzie dell'imputato nel procedimento di riesame ex art. 309 c.p.p.
NEGRO, MATTEO
2018/2019
Abstract
The individual's right to personal freedom is one of the fundamental values enshrined in our Constitutional Charter, as an indefectible principle for any democratic society that can be defined as such. However, it is the Constitution itself that provides for limitations on the freedom of the judicial authority, in the cases and in the ways prescribed by law, through the adoption of restrictive measures on the person, whose purpose is to meet needs that cannot wait for the epilogue of the trial, very often destined to arrive after a long time. In this system includes the institution of re-examination, introduced in 1982 by our legislator, also to comply with our country's international commitments, such as the Cedu and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. This tool allows anyone who is reached by a precautionary precautionary measure, the right to submit to a panel of judges, the whole issue on personal freedom so that the control involves both the merit and the legitimacy of the provision, allowing the accused finally a second-line check on the provision within a reasonable time. Compared to the original layout, however, the review has undergone an evolution of a guaranteed sign, both in the 1930 code and in the current 1988 code, to better satisfy the rights of the parties, in particular those of the private party, to a proceeding that ensures the protection of the individual in all respects. This paper aims to highlight those mechanisms and institutions that, within the various stages of the review process of the coercive measures, allow the accused to reach a decision on his status libertatis as quickly as possible, without sacrificing the right to a technical defense and to a dialectical comparison with the public part, if present, before a third judge.È consentito all'utente scaricare e condividere i documenti disponibili a testo pieno in UNITESI UNIPV nel rispetto della licenza Creative Commons del tipo CC BY NC ND.
Per maggiori informazioni e per verifiche sull'eventuale disponibilità del file scrivere a: unitesi@unipv.it.
https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14239/9906