"I'm with Jenkins, the people of Rome parade organizers red Art.378. General profile.
Facilitating staff protects the interest of the administration of justice to the proper conduct of investigations and research aimed at criminal proceedings and thus indirectly protecting the same process. The person offense is not only the state and the private. On one side is a crime of danger and is a common offense in what can be achieved by anyone. Active subject. There are four phrases on some problems of interpretation of Article .378. 1. The first problem concerns the phrase "except in cases of competition." In relation to what you want to say that when you do not just give aid, but is morally or materially involved in the crime is not an offense under Article. 378 but a competition in implementing a different offense. Also constitutes an organized crime in "contributing to the commission of a pipeline already started but not yet complete." More complex is the assumption that the predicate offense is a crime permanent. In this sense, the Court said that the aid provided to the person who perseveres consciously present in conduct constituting an offense typically permanent, such as conspiracy, a place in the competition generally in the offense and not aiding, unless a that aid is a simple facilitation of criminal activity and not a valuable encouragement. 2. The second problem of interpretation concerns the assumption that the subject is the same offender previously committed (so-called autofavoreggiamento). This is not punishable because Article refers to aid .378 served aa "certain" that the agent to different people. Similarly not punishable autofavoreggiamento mediated, that is when the help given to a third party is automatically reflected in a facilitation of himself. 3. The third problem of interpretation concerns the possibility that the person who favors both the victim of the predicate offense. In this case you can configure a crime pursuant to Art. 378 except in the case of crimes subject to the condition of a case where no-forgiveness would be tantamount to tacit. In that regard, in case it was stated that "commits the crime of abetting the name of the person who says nothing of the robbery he subito o comunque non palesa le circostanze che gli hanno permesso il recupero della refurtiva. 4. il quarto problema interpretativo riguarda la eventuale condotta di favoreggiamento posta in essere dal difensore. In particolare il problema consiste nel distinguere tra attività difensiva lecita e condotta illecita. Infine la giurisprudenza ha affermato che se l’attività del difensore consiste nel suggerire tecniche dilatorie o altre strategie non sottoposte a specifiche sanzioni allora il favoreggiamento non si configura. Se invece la sua attività è estranea al mandato difensivo si ha il reato di favoreggiamento. Si è poi ribadito anche che il difensore che assuma formalmente l’incarico a favore di un assistito, ma in realtà su impulso e mandato substantial other entities that provide material to hand, just to find out about his client's statements and report them to those, and then do so, constitutes conduct aimed at helping these individuals to elude investigations of 'authority, integrating the crime of abetting. Another controversial case is that of the physician providing care to a fugitive from justice by going to the place where they are. The Court denied in principle that integrates the crime in question the conduct of the physician who merely treat the fugitive. But if the activities of the physician is followed by a further conducted on behalf of the fugitive (non-completion of medical records, turn off the phone in his possession to avoid their location during the trip in favor of the person at large) to help you escape the search then you have aiding and abetting. Finally, it is particularly sensitive in cases where the challenged action to be a priest. In general, the agreement between Church and State in 1985 provides that the clergy are not required to provide information to judges when they first became aware in the exercise of their ministry. However it was considered that if the priest goes to the hideout of a mafia boss to celebrate Mass we are enabled to satisfy his spiritual needs integrates the crime of aiding and abetting aggravated.
Characters of the offense. As already mentioned the facilitation requires prior commission of a crime or a fine. Precisely for this reason should be noted that in the presence of the justifications of the predicate offense is lacking a basis of action and the same thing happens if I fail an objective or subjective elements of the crime or if there is no condition of admissibility. If, however, uses a cause of extinction of the previous offense must distinguish whether it is adopted before or after the supply of aid. In the first case, the facilitation is not configurable. Finally, the facilitation is not configured even if the predicate offense was abolished (abolitio criminis).
conduct. The pipeline is to assist in aiding someone to circumvent or evade the investigation of the searches for this. Very important in this regard is the concept of aid that has a particular configuration, since the crime of aiding and abetting included among the free-form: the important thing is that the aid is liable to frustrate the investigation. It should, however, that research or investigation to be circumvented by the courts or pg and not those of a private investigator. It is also highly controversial hypothesis of aiding and abetting committed by omission. The case law is generally oriented in the direction of the eligibility of action omission. However, the characteristics of the illegal conduct also suggest to the contrary opinion. The aiding and abetting is a crime punishable by way of general intent because the supply of aid can have free forms of manifestation. It is necessary that the agent wanted to help someone to knowingly circumvent or evade the investigation of the search, but the reasons are irrelevant behavior.
Article Circumstances and other characters. 378 paragraph 2 provides for an aggravating circumstance for those who make the facilitation towards those who committed an offense relating to Article. 416 bis: in that case, the penalty of imprisonment of not less than two years. This circumstance aggravating circumstance is particularly serious due to the aid of Mafia association. Must therefore demonstrate that the agent is aware of the quality mafia association to which he gives aid. Finally, consider that the subversive activities of aiding and abetting of crimes can be aggravated under l. 15/1980. Paragraph 3 of art. 378 provides a mitigating factor in cases in which the facilitation is carried out in favor of crimes for which the law prescribes a different penalty or a fine: here the penalty is a fine of up to 516 €. It is also not punishable who commits the offense to save the same or the next of kin of serious harm to freedom and honor (Art. 384.1). The facilitation is consumed in the moment in which the aid has been provided, while not required that the investigations are actually taking place. The attempt is permissible in cases where the failure to achieve the desired effect is for reasons beyond the control of the agent.
Competition of people and abetting of crimes With regard to the competition of people the only hypothesis of interest is represented by the fact that a person incites others to their facilitation. In that regard, some writers think that both parties are punished, while the Court finds that the responsibility is lacking here is more a question of incitement of autofavoreggiamento. As for the contest the issue of crime is not easy to solve because some writers think that the crime art. 378 offense is a subsidiary that applies only when the same conduct is already punished by the law in other ways. However, this view of the doctrine should be rejected. In fact, the facilitation has a subsidiary nature in relation to certain crimes such as slander or omitted reporting the crime, but other times there is a real competition between effective action to such real and personal. Moreover, as widely known, the support provides for the commission of a predicate offense within whose investigations helps someone, so if you want someone to help shield it from all’esecuzione della pena abbiamo il reato di procurata inosservanza di pena. Invece se durante il favoreggiamento si usa una condotta violenta si potrebbe avere il concorso con il reato di resistenza al pubblico ufficiale. Il concorso è ammissibile con i reati di associazione per delinquere e associazione di stampo mafioso. Infine non è configurabile il delitto di favoreggiamento personale bensì quello di detenzione illegale di armi nella condotta del ricevere un'arma ancorché determinata dall’intento di aiutare chi già la stia portando illegalmente.
FAVOREGGIAMENTO REALE Per molti aspetti si può rinviare al favoreggiamento personale. A ben vedere il favoreggiamento reale non è un vero e proprio delitto contro l’attività giudiziaria dato che principalmente tutela l’interesse a che non sia prestata ai delinquenti una collaborazione diretta a fare divenire definitivi i vantaggi acquisiti a mezzo del reato. Secondo altro orientamento l’art.379 è un vero delitto contro l’amministrazione della giustizia poiché compromette la confisca di beni o cose che sono prodotto del reato. La condotta del favoreggiamento reale consiste nell’aiutare qualcuno ad assicurare il prodotto o il profitto o il prezzo di un reato. Sul concetto di aiuto si rimanda all’art. 378, comunque in giurisprudenza si è affermato che costituisce concorso nel delitto di furto la promessa di acquistare le cose che poi saranno rubate anche se non specificate. Infatti in tal caso l’istigazione which is realized with the promise of the hypothesis does not allow the form of action and receiving stolen property. With the verb to ensure the bill is to make certain or definitive advantage that the offender has derived from the offense. In any case to incorporate the policy of aiding and abetting is only necessary to make the simple aid an offender regardless of the actual achievement of the product (what you buy directly or indirectly from a crime); of profit (each benefit from the crime ) price (any good that has been promised by the offender to commit the crime).
Other characters of the offense. Facilitating real intent is punishable as a generic, that is sufficient the will to do things that are objectively help the guilty. The crime is consumed at the time and place the staff member has engaged in behavior which is realized in the aid, regardless of the outcome of action. The attempt is permitted. As the competition of people may refer the previous article. As the competition of crime can be said that Article. 379 contains a proviso that allows its specific application except in cases of receiving, recycling and use of money, goods or assets of illicit origin. In the event of concealment of proceeds of crime covered by the constitutional distinction between aiding and receiving stolen property is identified solo nella sussistenza del dolo specifico richiesto per il secondo mentre rispetto al riciclaggio l’art. 379 ha una applicazione sussidiaria. In caso di detenzione illecita di sostanze stupefacenti, invece, ogni aiuto dato durante la condotta permanente è configurabile come concorso con il colpevole. Infine il favoreggiamento reale è ipotizzabile anche nel sequestro di persona a scopo di estorsione quando però la condotta dell’agente non è sorretta alla volontà di cooperare al sequestro stesso.
