ABSTRACT: The recent “additive” intervention made by the Constitutional Court with sentence no. 252 of 2020 established that the oral authorization by the Prosecutor for personal or domiciliary is not sufficient because it requires subsequent written validation, based on the notion of "motivated act". The contested legislation was incompatible with a series of constitutional parameters, including Articles 13, second paragraph, and 14, second paragraph, of the Constitution.
L’ESTENSIONE DELL’OBBLIGO DI CONVALIDA ALLE PERQUISIZIONI PERSONALI O DOMICILIARI AUTORIZZATE TELEFONICAMENTE (NOTA A CORTE COST. SENT. N.252/2020)
perchinunno
2021-01-01
Abstract
ABSTRACT: The recent “additive” intervention made by the Constitutional Court with sentence no. 252 of 2020 established that the oral authorization by the Prosecutor for personal or domiciliary is not sufficient because it requires subsequent written validation, based on the notion of "motivated act". The contested legislation was incompatible with a series of constitutional parameters, including Articles 13, second paragraph, and 14, second paragraph, of the Constitution.File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
