Este ensayo tiene el objetivo de estudiar el antagonismo identitario considerado como criterio de criminalización, sobretodo acerca de la presunción de peligrosidad de quien tiene una pertenencia antagonista. La investigación, en particular, analiza la disciplina penalística italiana en materia de inmigración, terrorismo, odio racial o étnico, poniendo en evidencia los aspectos de la compatibilidad entre normativas y principio de presunción de inocencia, con particular referencia a la sensatez que por la jurisprudencia, incluso europea, se invoca para suportar posibles derogaciones de la carga de la prueba de la acusación. Se concluye considerando difícilmente admisible, pues siempre irrazonable, cada forma de presunción de peligrosidad basada en la pura ‘diversidad’.
This essay has the aim to study the identitarian antagonism as a criminalization criterion, above all as regards the presumption of danger for those who have an antagonist association. The study, in particular, analyzes the Italian criminal discipline related to immigration, terrorism, racial and ethnic hate, underlining the aspects that seem to be inspired by the presumption of danger of the ‘different’. The investigation, then, also analyzes the compatibility between these regulations and the principle of presumption of innocence, especially about the sensibleness more than jurisprudence, also European, used to support possible exceptions for the burden of proof. It finishes considering hardly admissible, since it is considered unreasonable, every form of presumption of danger based on the mere ‘difference’.
La connotación ‘identitaria’ del derecho penal en Italia
CATERINI, Mario
2016-01-01
Abstract
This essay has the aim to study the identitarian antagonism as a criminalization criterion, above all as regards the presumption of danger for those who have an antagonist association. The study, in particular, analyzes the Italian criminal discipline related to immigration, terrorism, racial and ethnic hate, underlining the aspects that seem to be inspired by the presumption of danger of the ‘different’. The investigation, then, also analyzes the compatibility between these regulations and the principle of presumption of innocence, especially about the sensibleness more than jurisprudence, also European, used to support possible exceptions for the burden of proof. It finishes considering hardly admissible, since it is considered unreasonable, every form of presumption of danger based on the mere ‘difference’.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.