The strange case of Italian criminal prosecution
Mandatory prosecution doesn’t mean automatic sequentiality between the report of crime and trial, not even the duty of the prosecutor to start the trial for any “notitia criminis” when it is objectively superfluous. This rule places preliminary investigations outside the scope of the trial, establishing that, at their outcome, the obligation to prosecute arises only if the lack of the conditions that make it necessary to dismiss a case has been verified: in the circumstance of doubt, the prosecution must be exercised and not omitted. A reckless use of the criminal initiative can have negative consequences on the social, economic, family, political and health status of the suspected, or defendant. Consequences that aren’t remedied by an acquittal sentence that often is pronounced years later. In various democratic countries, the rules about the exercise of criminal prosecution are also specifically aimed at preventing trials that aren’t based on solid evidence in a way to avoid that citizens may be seriously damaged by this. On these assumptions arises the need to understand if the mandatory prosecution is still a principle respected in the actual Italian legal system.