With Ordinance no. 132 of 2020, the Constitutional Court has postponed of one year the decision on whether the criminal provisions envisaging custodial sentences for the offence of defamation committed through the press conflict with the Italian Constitution. Such postponement has been decided in order to grant the Parliament an adequate time to enact new legislation to amend such provisions and make them compatible with the Italian Constitution, removing the unconstitutional profiles that have been already identified by the Court. Such decision-making technique has been used in the past by the Constitutional Court, for instance in the Cappato case, raising certain doubts among scholars; however, in the case at stake it seems to be an acceptable solution if compared against the decisions that the Court could have taken and in light of the uncertainty that still characterize the orientation of the EDU Court on the subject of defamation committed through the press.
La pena detentiva per la diffamazione tra Corte costituzionale e Corte europea dei diritti dell’uomo: l’ordinanza della Corte costituzionale n. 132 del 2020 / M. Cuniberti. - In: OSSERVATORIO COSTITUZIONALE. - ISSN 2283-7515. - 2020:5(2020 Oct 06), pp. 121-139.
La pena detentiva per la diffamazione tra Corte costituzionale e Corte europea dei diritti dell’uomo: l’ordinanza della Corte costituzionale n. 132 del 2020
M. Cuniberti
2020
Abstract
With Ordinance no. 132 of 2020, the Constitutional Court has postponed of one year the decision on whether the criminal provisions envisaging custodial sentences for the offence of defamation committed through the press conflict with the Italian Constitution. Such postponement has been decided in order to grant the Parliament an adequate time to enact new legislation to amend such provisions and make them compatible with the Italian Constitution, removing the unconstitutional profiles that have been already identified by the Court. Such decision-making technique has been used in the past by the Constitutional Court, for instance in the Cappato case, raising certain doubts among scholars; however, in the case at stake it seems to be an acceptable solution if compared against the decisions that the Court could have taken and in light of the uncertainty that still characterize the orientation of the EDU Court on the subject of defamation committed through the press.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
2020_5_09_Cuniberti.pdf
accesso aperto
Descrizione: Articolo principale
Tipologia:
Publisher's version/PDF
Dimensione
453.08 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
453.08 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
Pubblicazioni consigliate
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.