The recent judgment of the Joint Session that qualified as abnormal the rejection of the request for an evidentiary accident pursuant to art. 392, paragraph 1-bis of the Criminal Procedure Code reopens the issue concerning the complex balance between the cognitive purpose of the trial and the need to protect the vulnerable declarant. Starting from the regulatory evolution of the institution of the protected evidentiary accident, we highlight the implications and impact arising from the growing centrality of the above-mentioned institute.
De Palo, F. (2025). L’obbligo di incidente probatorio protetto e il ritorno dell’istruzione formale. ARCHIVIO PENALE, 2025(1 (Gennaio-Aprile 2025 (Web))), 1-20.
L’obbligo di incidente probatorio protetto e il ritorno dell’istruzione formale
De Palo, FR
2025
Abstract
The recent judgment of the Joint Session that qualified as abnormal the rejection of the request for an evidentiary accident pursuant to art. 392, paragraph 1-bis of the Criminal Procedure Code reopens the issue concerning the complex balance between the cognitive purpose of the trial and the need to protect the vulnerable declarant. Starting from the regulatory evolution of the institution of the protected evidentiary accident, we highlight the implications and impact arising from the growing centrality of the above-mentioned institute.| File | Dimensione | Formato | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
De Palo-2025- Archivio Penale-VoR.pdf
accesso aperto
Tipologia di allegato:
Publisher’s Version (Version of Record, VoR)
Licenza:
Creative Commons
Dimensione
271.87 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
271.87 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.


