Post by account_disabled on Mar 12, 2024 4:55:41 GMT
An interpretation is needed that takes into account the principles of minimum intervention fragmentarity and subsidiarity of Criminal Law principles that are not only applicable when drafting the legislative norm but also in its daily application to the specific case which state that Criminal Law should not be called upon to protect “any injury to any legal asset but only the most serious injuries to the most relevant legal assets” Junqueira; Vanzolini p. . Therefore criminal typicality should only be invoked as a last resort when the previous sphere of protection proves to be demonstrably insufficient legally and materially with the accuser and the magistrate pointing out the way in which the administrative framework requires assistance from the instance. criminal offense and how the evidence submitted to the case demonstrates the concrete offensiveness of the conduct.
Given this perspective looking at the legal asset erected for protection by the legislator it is clear that the violation of the vast majority of published norms which cover the most varied Phone Number Data subjects does not have the capacity to seriously affect the economic order and must be relegated to administrative action also extensively regulated in ordinary law in the aforementioned Decree-Law and Law .
In fact and as an argument to support what we defend here it should be noted that both legislative acts mentioned above which are practically identical after discussing at length the various types of possible infractions at the administrative level whether regulated in the law itself or in regulatory act state the following in their final provisions:
“Once the infractions provided for in items and of art. of this Law and after the final decision rendered in the administrative process the competent authority of the a full copy of the case for the purposes set out in Decree-Law no. of December in Laws of September of June and of February and supervening legislation”
Now an interpretation that argues that any infraction of regulatory standards already constitutes a crime against the economic order would make this provision useless since then all administrative procedures would have to be reported by the administrative authority to the police or the Public Prosecutor's Office under penalty of malfeasance.
However starting from the old argument that there are no useless words in the law and that every normative interpretation must be systemic we want to believe that the provision is not random but rather that it is a criterion established by the legislator himself to reaffirm the exceptionality of conduct that has criminal relevance including contemplating the need for prior exhaustion of administrative remedies.
Given this perspective looking at the legal asset erected for protection by the legislator it is clear that the violation of the vast majority of published norms which cover the most varied Phone Number Data subjects does not have the capacity to seriously affect the economic order and must be relegated to administrative action also extensively regulated in ordinary law in the aforementioned Decree-Law and Law .
In fact and as an argument to support what we defend here it should be noted that both legislative acts mentioned above which are practically identical after discussing at length the various types of possible infractions at the administrative level whether regulated in the law itself or in regulatory act state the following in their final provisions:
“Once the infractions provided for in items and of art. of this Law and after the final decision rendered in the administrative process the competent authority of the a full copy of the case for the purposes set out in Decree-Law no. of December in Laws of September of June and of February and supervening legislation”
Now an interpretation that argues that any infraction of regulatory standards already constitutes a crime against the economic order would make this provision useless since then all administrative procedures would have to be reported by the administrative authority to the police or the Public Prosecutor's Office under penalty of malfeasance.
However starting from the old argument that there are no useless words in the law and that every normative interpretation must be systemic we want to believe that the provision is not random but rather that it is a criterion established by the legislator himself to reaffirm the exceptionality of conduct that has criminal relevance including contemplating the need for prior exhaustion of administrative remedies.