We have been brought up, by the legal system, to accept Shakespearian aphorism “What’s in a name? that which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet”. It is a principle that, applied to the less poetic world of law, exalts the essence of an act, of his content and reduces the importance of nomen iuris. However, sometimes a bold use of a “word” hides traps that could have repercussions on individual right of defense. I’m referring to the inspection of investigative police, where legislative inaction and deviant operative practices live together and which it is possible to remedy, paradoxically, only with the help of a nominalistic order. This one, impracticable on the legislative plan because of the atypical and numerous activities of investigative police, becomes necessary on the operative plan, in order to prevent a bold, unredeemable and intolerable deprivation of fundamental human rights.
|Number of pages||8|
|Journal||PROCESSO PENALE E GIUSTIZIA|
|Publication status||Published - 2013|