The provisional detenction and the others pre-trial precautionary measures mark the area that, more than any other, ensures immediate effectiveness to the statual reactive intervention against criminal phenomena fomenting social insecurity: for this reason the security policies so frequently use the restrictive measures as a elective choice. The costs may, however, be conspicuous: reforms that are too casual, propitiated by confused interchanges between security and emergency, prejudice the centrality of the presumption of innocence and lead to dangerous overlaps between precautionary and substantive preventive purposes. The events of the precautionary automatisms offer, in this sense, an illuminating test: inspired by security logic, the emergency legislation on art. 275, par. 3, criminal procedural code have grafted into the system unacceptable misunderstandings, causing numerous orthopedic interventions of Italian Constitutional Court which have traced the path of the 2015 reform.
|Numero di pagine||10|
|Rivista||DIRITTO PENALE E PROCESSO|
|Stato di pubblicazione||Published - 2019|