The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) ruled Thursday that Italy did not violate the European Convention on Human Rights by determining that an inmate’s life sentence should not be reduced to 30 years. The court found that the applicant, Ferdinando Cesarano, could not legitimately have expected to receive any other penalty than “life imprisonment without daytime isolation.” The court held Italy did not violate the principle of “no punishment without law” under Article 7 of the convention or the right to a fair trial under Article 6 Paragraph 1.
Cesarano complained that the Italian courts had “invented new criteria” that prevented him from getting his sentence reduced to 30 years imprisonment under a Summary Procedure (SP) trial. An SP is a simplified procedure that forms an agreement between the state and the accused person to grant a reduced sentence in the event of conviction in exchange for a streamlined trial procedure.
When Cesarano was committed in 1993 on charges of mass murder, there was no option to request an SP yet. In January 2000, Decree-law no. 479 came into force, meaning Cesarano then had the chance to request a summary procedure and could have received a sentence reduction to 30 years imprisonment if he had done so. However, Cesarano did not request an SP even though his co-defendants did, and their requests were granted. In November of that same year, section 7 of Decree-Law no. 341 came into force and amended the definition of “life imprisonment,” meaning that the term would be interpreted to mean “life imprisonment with daytime isolation” instead of “life imprisonment without daytime isolation.” Because of the change, Cesarano was no longer eligible for a sentence reduction.
Cesarano was convicted in 2007 and was sentenced to “life imprisonment with daytime isolation.” In 2012, when he appealed, he requested a Summary Procedure, which was granted. The court viewed that Cesarano may have expected to have the retrospective effect of the law that can grant the reduction of a life sentence to 30 years imprisonment. However, the key difference between that case and Cesarano’s case was that Cesarano did not request a trial under an SP while Decree-law no. 479 was in force and Decree-law no. 341 did not amend the sentence reduction yet. The court answered that in cases of simplified process that depends on the request of the accused person run from the date of request for trial until the date of the conviction.
Recommendation no. R (87) 18 of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe urges member states to take into account their own legal principles and legal traditions concerning the introduction of simplified and summary procedures in criminal proceedings. Section 7 of Decree-law no. 341 was ruled unconstitutional in 2013, but the ruling did not affect Cesarano’s case.
