Gianluca Moro

On 17 November 2017, the Tribunale di Brindisi (Italy) lodged a request for a preliminary ruling in the frame of the criminal proceedings against Gianluca Moro. The Italian court referred the following question: Must Article 2(1), Article 3(1)(c) and Article 6(1), (2) and (3) of Directive 2012/12/EU on the right to information in criminal proceedings, and Article 48 of the Charter as well, be interpreted as precluding procedural rules under the criminal law of a Member State on the basis of which the safeguards for the rights of the defence following a change to the charge are guaranteed in terms that differ, both in quality and in quantity, depending on whether that change relates to the factual elements of the charge or to its legal classification, in particular allowing the accused person only in the first case to request the alternative and beneficial procedure of the imposition of a negotiated penalty (the ‘patteggiamento’ procedure)?

On 5 February 2019, Advocate General Bobek delivered his Opinion, where he concludes that the above-mentioned Directive 2012/13/EU and Article 48(2) of the Charter do not preclude procedural rules such as the ones at issue in the main proceedings that allow the accused person to request a negotiated penalty after the beginning of the trial only if there is a change to the accusation that is of a factual nature, and not when the change is of a legal nature.

On 13 June 2019, the Court of Justice ruled as follows (English translation not yet available): L’article 6, paragraphe 4, de la directive 2012/13/UE du Parlement européen et du Conseil, du 22 mai 2012, relative au droit à l’information dans le cadre des procédures pénales, et l’article 48 de la charte des droits fondamentaux de l’Union européenne doivent être interprétés en ce sens qu’ils ne s’opposent pas à une réglementation nationale en vertu de laquelle la personne poursuivie peut demander, au cours de la procédure orale, l’application d’une peine négociée dans le cas d’une modification des faits sur lesquels l’accusation est fondée, et non dans le cas d’une modification de la qualification juridique des faits faisant l’objet de l’accusation.