Although shaped by an increasingly monolithic supranational practice – which has introduced into it prerequisites and outcomes (the so-called close connection test) alien to its classical structure - ne bis in idem, as transposed into dual-track punitive systems, has not lost its nature as a procedural safeguard protecting the individual’s right to the “uniqueness” of criminal prosecution. Underpinning the substantial and temporal connection requirements, as established under the ECHR and EU law, lies the fundamental need to ensure that a person is not subjected to multiple punitive proceedings for the same act. This goal has also been affirmed by the most advanced developments in constitutional case law. Nonetheless, numerous questions remain regarding the operational morphology of the mechanism, whose refinement takes place within a landscape marked by uncertainty, inconsistency, and contradiction, still entrusted to the fluid dynamics of law in action.
Seppur manipolato da una oramai monolitica prassi sovranazionale, che vi ha innestato presupposti ed esiti (il c.d. close connection test) estranei alla sua classica fisionomia, il ne bis in idem, trapiantato nel comparto dei doppi binari, non ha smarrito la natura di garanzia processuale a presidio del diritto individuale alla “unicità” della persecuzione penale. Alla base dei requisiti di connessione sostanziale e temporale, coniati a livello convenzionale ed euro-unitario, si staglia, infatti, la necessità di assicurare al soggetto di non essere esposto a plurimi procedimenti punitivi per il medesimo fatto; obiettivo, questo, avvalorato anche dai più maturi approdi della giurisprudenza costituzionale. Numerosi restano, tuttavia, gli interrogativi attinenti alla morfologia operativa del congegno, la cui messa a punto si inscrive in uno scenario dominato da incertezze, disarmonie e contraddizioni, tuttora affidato alle fluide dinamiche del law in action.
I doppi binari punitivi nel prisma del ne bis in idem processuale
P. Troisi
2025
Abstract
Although shaped by an increasingly monolithic supranational practice – which has introduced into it prerequisites and outcomes (the so-called close connection test) alien to its classical structure - ne bis in idem, as transposed into dual-track punitive systems, has not lost its nature as a procedural safeguard protecting the individual’s right to the “uniqueness” of criminal prosecution. Underpinning the substantial and temporal connection requirements, as established under the ECHR and EU law, lies the fundamental need to ensure that a person is not subjected to multiple punitive proceedings for the same act. This goal has also been affirmed by the most advanced developments in constitutional case law. Nonetheless, numerous questions remain regarding the operational morphology of the mechanism, whose refinement takes place within a landscape marked by uncertainty, inconsistency, and contradiction, still entrusted to the fluid dynamics of law in action.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.


