Abstract
[Autom. eng. transl.] The preventive seizure of "things for which confiscation is allowed" affects fundamental human rights, which do not allow simplifications (frequent in practice) in the "test" and in the "motivation" of judicial measures. The initial systematic choices of the 1988 Criminal Procedure Code revealed all their fragility, following the legislative and jurisprudential evolution on the subject, in the face of ductile and effective patrimonial contrast instruments, for ever wider categories of crimes. Finally, the d. lgs. n. 21 of 2018 confirms an unstoppable regulatory trend: the centrality not only of confiscation and seizure to hit the crime of profit, but also of the judicial administration of the assets subject to the bond, according to the model outlined by the d. lgs. n. 159 of 2011, to safeguard the social, economic and employment interests involved.
| Translated title of the contribution | [Autom. eng. transl.] Seizure for confiscation purposes: from the choices of the 1988 code to d. lgs. n. 21/2018 |
|---|---|
| Original language | Italian |
| Title of host publication | La materia penale tra diritto nazionale ed europeo |
| Pages | 359-386 |
| Number of pages | 28 |
| Publication status | Published - 2018 |
UN SDGs
This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
-
SDG 16 Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
Keywords
- Confisca
- sequestro
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of '[Autom. eng. transl.] Seizure for confiscation purposes: from the choices of the 1988 code to d. lgs. n. 21/2018'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver