SAN MARINO – Four years to reach a first degree sentence on a case of publication of the names of minors involved in criminal proceedings. To reconstruct the story is Antonio Fabbriin an article published on San Marino Informationin which he retraces the numerous judicial steps that preceded the conviction of Marco Severini, of journalismfor violation of article 192-bis, paragraph 2 of the Penal Code, to a fine of a few hundred euros with a suspended sentence.
The story dates back to October 20, 2022, when the details of some minors and their parents were published. The names, according to what Fabbri reports, are still online today after 1,434 days. On 11 April 2023 the same Fabbri e Carlo Filippinirespectively editor-in-chief and director of the newspaper, presented a complaint to the Court of San Marino, hypothesizing the violation of the criminal provisions and the legislation on the protection of personal data.
The proceeding went through two dismissals, as many appeals, reopening of the investigation and further judicial steps, up to the first degree sentence, which sentenced Severini to a small fine, with a suspended sentence.
At the center of the matter is the interpretation of the ban on publishing information that allows the identification of minors involved, in any capacity, in criminal proceedings. The first filing, ordered on 10 May 2023 by the Law Commissioner Roberto Battaglinowas based on the fact that the original trial had taken place in a public hearing and on a restrictive interpretation of the law.
Against this decision Fabbri and Filippini, assisted by the lawyer Enrico Carattonithey appealed. On 26 July 2023 the Judge of Appeal Renato Bricchettiwith ordinance no. 30/2023, annulled the dismissal and ordered the reopening of the investigations, entrusting them to another investigating judge.
In the reasons, Bricchetti clarified that the protection of minors’ privacy operates regardless of whether the hearing is public or not and the role played by the minor in the proceedings. The ban also concerns the dissemination of elements that make indirect identification possible.
Despite the appeal ruling, the proceeding underwent further steps, including a second dismissal, a new appeal, a criminal decree of conviction, an appeal for an abnormal act declared inadmissible and a constitutional exception accepted.
In the same article Fabbri also reports on a second proceeding, which ended with a questionable acquittal of Severini from the accusation of defamation against him, for having defined him as a prejudiced person, when he is not a prejudiced person.
The reconstruction published on San Marino Information draws attention to the times and difficulties encountered in the application of a provision intended to protect the privacy of minors, even when judicial proceedings take place publicly.
