few days ago I received a letter published the text of the amendment referring to "minor sexual acts." Per comodità di lettura e per un confronto diretto con l'intervento dettagliato di Enrico, ne riporto qui sotto la prima parte del testo:
"EMENDAMENTO 1517 Ricevo e volentieri pubblico:
VIOLENZA SESSUALE "LIEVE" AI MINORI:Si erano inventati un emendamento proprio carino.
Zitti zitti, nel disegno di legge sulle intercettazioni avevano infilato l'emendamento 1.707, quello
che introduceva il termine di "Violenza sessuale di lieve entità" nei confronti di minori.
Some senators Signatories of the PDL League and they proposed the abolition of arrest in flagrante delicto
in cases of sexual violence against children, where - exactly - a "minor".
it did not specify as to take place, in practice, a sexual assault "minor" in
against a child. "Then followed the names of the signatories.
The above text I get from Henry welcomes the intervention and a thorough public
Vorrei commentare l’articolo da te recentemente pubblicato sul tuo sito (non sono riuscito a inserire un commento nel sito).
In primis, mi risulta che l’emendamento oggetto del tuo articolo sia il n. 1707 (e non il 1517), proposto nel giugno scorso.
Credo che chi te l’ha inviato non abbia approfondito la delicata tematica sottesa, prescindendo in modo colpevole da una attenta analisi delle fonti; soprattutto si è data una matrice politica ad una questione che aveva solo un connotato tecnico, travisando i fatti ad uso esclusivamente politico.
"I suspect I were enormity of that" the abolition of arrest in flagrante delicto in cases of sexual violence against children, "the invitation to the record the names and the absence of references to the offending text, which should rather be evidence of wrongdoing. After much research, I found the link to the discussion which took place in the Senate on the subject - http://www.senato.it/japp/bgt/showdoc/frame.jsp?tipodoc=SommComm&leg=16&id = 483752 - which shows a very different reality.
First, it appears that no mention at all of "sexual abuse of minor" but of "sexual acts of lesser gravity" , which is not the same thing as we see it now: what determines the "minor gravity ", in fact, is the fact that these acts are carried out between consenting both almost the same age!
Finally, it appears that the concept of "minor" is not introduced from scratch, but is already present in the Penal Code - http://www.usciamodalsilenzio.org/rassegnastampa/articoli-codice-penale . pdf - and it was just applying the non-mandatory (that does not mean absolute exclusion) stop.
analyze in detail these points, drawing on the Senate report:
"President Berson, who will in alerting the illustration of sub-amendments to Amendment 1707, calls attention colleagues on this provision, noting that in this case we are faced with the problem of a serious misreading of public opinion and the media about the scope of this amendment, which was by many presented as a kind of disposition in favor of the pedophiles, the proposal on the basis of phantom pressure from Vatican circles, and should therefore be working on a formulation that leaves no doubt about the true intentions of the amendment.
The rapporteur CENTARI (PDL) said that the amendment has been presented largely for the sake of harmony of the system: in fact, as we know, Article 380 of the Criminal Procedure Code does not provide crime of sexual acts with minors, under Article 609-quater, including those for which the arrest is mandatory in the act, although it does sexual violence, referred to in Article 609-bis, but excluding the aforesaid mandatory for minor cases: it was therefore logical that, when inserted in the crime of 609-c among those for which there is the ' mandatory arrest in flagrante delicto, which was expected due to a similar exclusion. "
The rapporteur CENTARI (PDL) said that the amendment has been presented largely for the sake of harmony of the system: in fact, as we know, Article 380 of the Criminal Procedure Code does not provide crime of sexual acts with minors, under Article 609-quater, including those for which the arrest is mandatory in the act, although it does sexual violence, referred to in Article 609-bis, but excluding the aforesaid mandatory for minor cases: it was therefore logical that, when inserted in the crime of 609-c among those for which there is the ' mandatory arrest in flagrante delicto, which was expected due to a similar exclusion. "
Translation: cpp originally provided for the arrest in the case of acts between adults, while not provided for those of juveniles. At this lack has been remedied, but asymmetrically: for the majority, in fact, the law already provided for the non-mandatory arrest for cases "less serious" (non-violent) while the juvenile, no.
[ Ed. More precise: the obligation to arrest under Article. Cpp 380 paragraph 2 letter d-bis) for the crimes of sexual violence, exclusion - already! - The minor cases. With paragraph 22 of the 1611 bill in question was added to the obligation to arrest for the crime of sexual acts (not rape). But they had forgotten this rule for cases of minor offenses, like rape. So that there would be an absurd to say that it was agreed that violence, even if there had not been ].
The thing is explained by a senator of the Democratic Party, certainly not pro-government, while criticizing the form that acknowledges the good intentions
"After a speech by Senator Casson (PD) , who believes that the problem that caused the submission of the amendment, namely the need to avoid arrest mandatory in case of relationships between adolescents ... "
... "After intervention of Senator Della Monica (PD) and Senator Casson (PD), who consider that the problem can best be addressed by intervening in the Criminal Code, the Senator FINOCCHIARO (PD) looks like with regard to Article 609-bis, the question of minor refers essentially to the conduct of the offense, and in fact is linked to the collapse of the distinction between two different types of crime depending on whether it is worn or not sexual intercourse , a distinction that occurs prior to the reform of 1996, respectively, crimes punishable by the repealed Articles 519 and 521 of the Penal Code.
But in the case of Article 609-quater this issue overlaps with the age of the actors involved and the need not to criminalize the relationship between adolescent problem at that time was resolved in a satisfactory and probably inelastic , the rest not only on this occasion that she has raised the problem of how to modify the third paragraph of Article 609-quater, a question certainly not easy to solve . "
replication shows that the choice of intervenire sul Codice Penale ha i suoi rischi, ma soprattutto fa un esempio concreto di cosa sia un atto “di minore gravità”:
But in the case of Article 609-quater this issue overlaps with the age of the actors involved and the need not to criminalize the relationship between adolescent problem at that time was resolved in a satisfactory and probably inelastic , the rest not only on this occasion that she has raised the problem of how to modify the third paragraph of Article 609-quater, a question certainly not easy to solve . "
replication shows that the choice of intervenire sul Codice Penale ha i suoi rischi, ma soprattutto fa un esempio concreto di cosa sia un atto “di minore gravità”:
« Il relatore CENTARO (PdL) osserva come gli interventi sul codice penale, magari opportuni, rischiano di lasciare irrisolte alcune questioni che il suo emendamento si proponeva di riservare alla prudente valutazione del giudice. Ad esempio, laddove si decidesse di allargare la sfera di non punibilità per i minorenni, resterebbe il rischio di dover disporre l’arresto obbligatorio per un ragazzo di 18 anni sorpreso ad accompagnarsi con una tredicenne.
Il senatore LONGO (PDL) notes that in addressing this matter should be taken into account the fact that, following the abolition of the distinction between rape and Sexual assault in the last 14 years the Court has developed a concept extremely lata sexual acts, which leads us to consider carefully the consequences that would have the lack of consideration for the purposes of mandatory arrest in cases of flagrante delicto of the existence of lesser gravity. "
Il senatore LONGO (PDL) notes that in addressing this matter should be taken into account the fact that, following the abolition of the distinction between rape and Sexual assault in the last 14 years the Court has developed a concept extremely lata sexual acts, which leads us to consider carefully the consequences that would have the lack of consideration for the purposes of mandatory arrest in cases of flagrante delicto of the existence of lesser gravity. "
In particular, the intervention of Longo highlights the difference between" rape "and" sexual acts ", referring to age (for which the law is already complete) should be remembered, in fact, that among the "sexual acts" include the dead hand, the caress, the whistles of appreciation and in some cases even the prying eyes. All "acts" which are undoubtedly "less serious" than rape, and it would be unwise to provide for the mandatory arrest for having blown the whistle to the passage of a beautiful girl ...
At this point, highlighted the complexity of matter and not precise formula that could give rise to misunderstandings, it is proposed to re-discuss it later. The proposal is reasonable and is readily accepted.
The issue in the Senate, it ends well, begins the campaign of criminalization through internet ...
The issue in the Senate, it ends well, begins the campaign of criminalization through internet ...
That brings the concept of the uncontrolled use of the Internet as a threat to democracy, another delicate matter that sooner or later must be dealt with seriously. Because if it is so easy to create monsters to hold up to public contempt, it is equally easy to manipulate public opinion (and voters) by spreading "false and tendentious news" like this ...
One thing we can do it us users from the start, though: avoid blatant appeals to spread without properly checking sources and try to remove those disseminated by others.
PS. All text amendment of the notorious 1707 (shown in the attachments in the first link) is reduced to this sentence: "In paragraph 22, after the words" Article 609-c "insert the following:", except in the case provided by the fourth paragraph. "on Article of the Criminal Code set out in the second link." 
0 comments:
Post a Comment