[Autom. eng. transl.] In recent years, in an attempt to enhance criminal subsidiarity and to encourage the deflation of processes, the legislator has introduced various causes lato sensu of non-punishable offenses within the criminal code. In providing for the particular tenuousness of the fact (Article 131 bis of the Criminal Code), the remedial conducts (Article 162 ter of the Criminal Code), the probation (Article 168 bis of the Criminal Code) and, lastly, with the so-called corrupt sweep law the collaborative conduct referred to in art. 323 ter of the Criminal Code we have, however, "forgotten" that some of the crimes falling within the scope of operations of these institutions can also establish the dependent, but autonomous, liability of the body pursuant to Legislative Decree 231/2001 and it would have been desirable to take an express position on the interrelations between the criminal code and the microcode contained in the legislative decree 231/2001. In light of the correct application of the latter discipline and, in particular, of art. 8, Legislative Decree 231/2001, a general irrelevance of the punishment of the natural person on the punishment of the legal person can be argued, even if the intervention of the same legislator would be appropriate to restore some systematic coherence.
|Translated title of the contribution||[Autom. eng. transl.] Autonomy of the sanctioning system charged to the entity in Legislative Decree 231/2001 and non-punishable offense by the accused of the predicate offense|
|Number of pages||8|
|Journal||LA RESPONSABILITÀ AMMINISTRATIVA DELLE SOCIETÀ E DEGLI ENTI|
|Publication status||Published - 2020|
- Responsabilità da reato degli enti