5. Legal Norms Against the Italian Mafia

For a critical view see Mignosi, Profili e problemi, Palermo, 1927, 143. A detailed overview on this former phase is offered by Lupo, Storia della mafia. Dalle origini ai giorni nostri, Roma 1993, 19s.

At this regard see Petta, Reati associativi e libertà di associazione, in Il delitto politico dalla fine dell’ottocento ai giorni nostri, Roma, 1984, 198s.; De Francesco, I reati di associazione politica, Milano, 1985; Pelissero, Reato politico e flessibilità delle categorie dogmatiche, Napoli, 2000; Militello , Offences against the state. Old Basis, Recent Trends and Perspectives on reform. In Universalis. Liber Amicorum Cyrille Fijnaut, T. Spapens et al. (eds.), Intersentia, Antwerpen-Cambridge, 2011, 191s., 198.

Refer to Boscarelli, Associazione per delinquere, in Enc. Dir., III, 1958, 865s.; Patalano, L’associazione per delinquere, Napoli, 1971; Insolera, L’associazione per delinquere, Padova, 1983; Neppi Modona, Criminalità organizzata e reati associativi, in Beni e tecniche della tutela penale, Milano, 1987, 107s.; G. De Francesco, Societas sceleris. Tecniche repressive delle associazioni criminali, in Riv.it.dir.proc.pen., 1992, 54s.; De Vero, Tutela dell’ordine pubblico e reati associativi, Milano, 1988; Valiante, L’associazione criminosa, Milano, 1997; I reati associativi, Milano, 1998; I reati associativi: paradigmi concettuali e materiale probatorio, Picotti ed al. (cur.), Padova, 2005.

Similar importance has had, significantly earlier, the Parliamentary Commission of Inquiry in the former Kingdom of Italy (established by law 3.7.1875) which contained great reference to the situation of public security in Sicily, and particularly to the mafia: on this topic refer to the Relazione della giunta per l’inchiesta delle condizioni della Sicilia, Roma 1876, especially 111. A private inquiry was, however, conducted in the same period by Franchetti and Sonnino (e.g. Tessitore, Il nome e la cosa. Quando la mafia non si chiamava mafia, Milano, 1997, 109s.).

The circumstance that the problem had long been overlooked was raised also by Falcone, Il fenomeno mafioso: dalla consuetudine secolare all’organizzazione manageriale (1988), in Id., Interventi e proposte (1982–1992), Milano, 1994, 318s.

Refer to Conso, La criminalità organizzata nel linguaggio del legislatore, in Giust. Pen., III, 1992, p. 387. Moreover, in Italy the expression was firstly and mainly used in relation to criminal procedure: see Insolera, La nozione normativa di “criminalità organizzata” e di “mafiosità”: il delitto associativo, le fattispecie aggravanti e quelle di rilevanza processuale, in Indice penale, 2001, 20s.

On the issue on a European level please refer to Militello, Transnational Organised Crime and European Union: Aspects and Problem, in Human Rights in European Criminal Law, S. Ruggeri (eds.), Springer Switzerland, 2015, p. 201s.

The vagueness of the definition represents a long-standing problem: among the many contributions refer to Fiandaca, Criminalità organizzata e controllo penale, in Bassiouni et al. (cur.), Studi in onore di G. Vassalli, Milano, 1991, 33s.; H.-J. Albrecht, Organisierte Kriminalität—Theoretischen Erklärungen und empirische Befunde in Id. et al. (Hrsg.), Organisierte Kriminalität und Verfassungsstaat, Heidelberg, 1998, 3s.; Anarte Borrallo, Conjeturas sobre la criminalidad organizada, in Ferré Olivé/Anarte Borallo (eds.), Delinquencia Organizada. Aspectos penales, procesuales y criminologicos, Huelva, 1999, 20s.; Zaffaroni, Il crimine organizzato: una categorizzazione fallita, in Moccia (cur.), Criminalità organizzata e risposte ordinamentali, Napoli, 1999, 63s.

A reconstruction of the different positions is offered by Moccia, La perenne emergenza, Torino, 1998, specie 88s, and also by Vassalli, Emergenza criminale e sistema penale (1995), in Ultimi scritti, Milano, 2007, 9s.

On the subject Hassemer, Kennzeichnen und Krisen des modernen Strafrechts, in Zeit. für Rechtspolitik 1992, 378s. Silva Sanchez, La expansión del derecho penal (1998), tr.it. L’espansione del diritto penale, Militello (cur.), Milano 2004, 5; Jakobs, Diritto penale del nemico, in Donini/Papa (cur.), Diritto penale del nemico. Un dibattito internazionale, Milano, 2007, specie 17s.

In addition to the references provided above in Footnote 3 subsequent to the introduction of Article 416 bis, also refer to Ingroia, L’associazione di tipo mafioso, I Milano, 1993; Turone, Il delitto di associazione mafiosa, Milano, 1995; Ronco, L’art. 416 bis nella sua origine e nella sua attuale portata applicativa, in B. Romano/Tinebra (cur.), Il diritto penale della criminalità organizzata, Milano, 2013, 55s.

See Insolera, Diritto penale e criminalità organizzata, Bologna, 1997, 11s.

The legislative definition of mafia method recalls former jurisprudential decisions relating to preventive measures, rather than sociological analysis: e.g. see Cass 8.6.1976, Nocera, in Giust.Pen. 1977. For instance, the vague definition of “omertà” has been intended as “absolute or unconditional refusal to cooperate with public institutions”, in a relation of cause and effect with the force of intimidation of the organisation, which is not required to have a necessary general scope, but should only be sufficiently widespread and derive not only from the fear of physical harms, but also from direct and/or symbolic and indirect threats: in practice, it should be a widespread opinion that the (eventual) cooperation with the judicial authority will result in potential retaliation against the person who cooperates and/or her (not just material) goods… “given the structure and operational capacity of the organisation and the existence of other non-identifiable members able to harm those who have opposed resistance (as stated by Cass. Sez. I, 10.7.2007, no. 34974, Brusca, RV237619).

Refer to Palazzo, La recente legislazione penale, Padova, III ed. 1985, 236.

An important direct testimoniancy can be found in the memoirs of the President of the Court of First Instance of Palermo: Giordano, Il maxiprocesso venticinque anni dopo, Acireale-Roma 2011.

The most famous being the committee of the sheets, formed of private citizens who decided to challenge the wall of silence (omertà) and the climate of fear imposed by the mafia, by hanging a white bed sheet on their balconies to publicly express their anti-mafia feeling (for an updated overview see Alaimo, Un lenzuolo contro la mafia, Marsala, 2012).

The scope of the offence has long remained limited and the necessity to amend the relevant provision in a way to include the reference to any benefit has only recently resulted in the amendment of the relevant offence by law 17.4.2014 no. 62 (refer to Amarelli, La riforma del reato di scambio elettorale-politico mafioso, in Diritto penale contemporaneo—Riv. Trim., 2014/2, 4s.; Squillaci, Il “nuovo” reato di scambio elettorale politico-mafioso. Pregi e limiti di una riforma necessaria, in Archivio penale, 2014/3).

In particular, as regards the right to respect for private correspondence the court has found a violation of Article 8 HCHR (rule of law principle), as the hard prison regime is applied with an order issued by the Ministry of Justice: see on this European Court on Human Right, judgement of 21/12/2000, Natoli v. Italy Italia; judgment of 28/09/07, Messina v. Italy. On this topic please also refer to Militello, Der Einfluss der Entscheidungen des Europäischen Gerichtshofes für Menschenrechte auf die italienische Strafrechtsordnung, in Strafrecht und Wirtschaftsstrafrecht—Festschrift für K. Tiedemann, Sieber et al. (Hrsg.), München, 2008, 1421s.

In this regard, the data collected in the extortion racket database of the research unit of Palermo in the project “GLODERS” clearly show that the number of cases where the victims resist against the extortion are limited and represent a minority compared to those where victims consent or even cooperate (and are thus complicit) with the authors of the extortive request. These results were found even in relation to cases, object of the research, which occurred in a period where victims already received public economic support.

For an analysis of these trends see Militello, Sicherheit und Strafrecht: ein “rationaler Dissens”. Italienische und transnationale Wandlungen, in Innere Sicherheit im europäischen Vergleich. Sicherheitsdenken, Sicherheitskonzepte und Sicherheitsarchitektur im Wandel, Band 1, Münster 2012, p. 277s.

The Constitutional Court has recently considered the question of the legitimacy of confiscation where the subject dies highlighting, also on the basis of the matters referred, the procedural character of the measure and reaffirming the differences between criminal trial and prevention proceedings (judgement 2012/21).

See Menditto, Verso la riforma del d.lgs. n. 159/2011 (cd. codice antimafia) e della confisca allargata, in www.​penalecontempora​neo.​it who summarises the main shortcomings of the provisions as follows: “failure to update the proceeding and repeal of provisions incompatible with a ‘fair’ prevention proceeding, failure to include specific provisions on incompetence, incompleteness of the provisions concerning the administration of goods, disproportionate assimilation to the protection of third parties in the insolvency procedure”.

Prisoners on 31st December classified on the basis of various types of offences in the period 2008–2011:

The figures referred above to the relevant types of offences reflect the exact number of offenders. Offenders who have committed more than one of the above offences are counted within each relevant category. It follows that each category should be considered separately and the figures should not be summed up.