Tuesday, June 3, 2014

The sixth section of the Supreme Court dropped the charge of

AldoGiannuli.it poundstretcher store locator Blog Archive Cade terrorism charges to no speed: good news, but ...
The sixth section of the Supreme Court dropped the charge of "conduct for purposes of terrorism" for the launch of some Molotov cocktails at yards Tav, following which some machinery was destroyed, while there was no harm to people, working in the gallery, where the fire spread randomly. The accusation poundstretcher store locator was so disproportionate that the Supreme Court, which also is not a hotbed of dangerous insurrectionary poundstretcher store locator anarchists, had to recognize the groundlessness and establish that the offense should be redefined more realistically. Obviously we are pleased with this result for the four accused, poundstretcher store locator which we hope to be treated with fairness and mercy, both on account of their young age and the particular conditions in which it is to be fighting in the Susa Valley, in front of the absolute deafness of institutions and political forces to instances of the local population. Well, but the speech does not end here, because that is four citizens, as a result of this legal nonsense, were subjected to a maximum-security prison regime, with measures afflictive of all proportion to the fact.
And, most importantly, will face a criminal trial in a psychological disadvantage, because it is already changing the classification of the offense seem a measure of clemency, so it will be more difficult to obtain than those mitigating circumstances would have been different starting conditions. And here are two problems: the standard and its users.
L 'art. 270 sexies of the Penal Code. Conducted with the purpose of terrorism, was added (by art. 15, Dl July 27, 2005, no. 144 (converted, with amendments, by Law of 31 July 2005 no. 155) in the atmosphere is certainly not clear after the terrible attack September 11, 2001 and reads verbatim:
<< 1. Purposes of terrorism shall be regarded as conduct that, by its nature or context, may seriously damage a country or an international organization and are carried out in order to intimidate poundstretcher store locator a population or compel a government or an 'international organization to perform or abstain from performing any act or destabilize or destroy the fundamental political, constitutional, economic and social structures of a country poundstretcher store locator or an international organization, poundstretcher store locator as well as other activities defined for purposes of terrorism or terrorism conventions or other rules of international law binding on Italy >>
Note too vague and imprecise in nature of the criminal poundstretcher store locator offense: do not even need to be explicit that the use of violence (which is implied), but, very broadly, it speaks of a "conduct ..." and specify that it is applicable even in the case where the order is to "force public authorities ... to do or abstain from doing any act", as if the above lines do not cover the area with sufficient poundstretcher store locator amplitude behavior to be punished with such severity. What does it say "any act"? poundstretcher store locator If a group of citizens seeking to prevent the eviction of squats, maybe barricades, certainly is a crime, but we can talk about terrorism for this? And if the attempt to induce the authorities to rescind a decision was made fraudulently, we could talk about terrorism? The rule is so expansive that no one can understand where it should stop.
And 'understandable (but only up to a certain point) that, faced with the threat of international terrorism, the legislature could have done to get carried away, but today, a decade from those facts and as much a threat in perspective, we must continue to keep a standard so dangerously fluid? These are the damage of the "rules of exception" for entering into an emergency and then remain there even when the emergency has passed. And this, among other things, helps to shape the mentality of judges by directing them towards the use of non garantista of criminal law (as in this country it were needed, that we are left with the judiciary!).
And, in fact, in the last ten years we have witnessed a trend of prosecutors to raise the bar, of course, when it comes to social conflict, while the attitude is more than six-row barley for financial crimes or for members of the police, in which case go in the cavalry even murders. By now he denies the crime of destruction and looting even if someone smashes a window or another pulls down a street sign and the charges for serious offenses such as peanuts are sown. Even there arises the problem of proportioning of the Act with respect to the possible effects. The investigator of the No Tav reasoned in this way: "The launch of the molotov

No comments:

Post a Comment