The Constitutional Court: “It is unconstitutional to deny benefits to life-sentenced prisoners”

“It is unconstitutional to deny any penitentiary benefit to those sentenced to life imprisonment for having caused the death of a person kidnapped for the purpose of extortion, terrorism or subversion, before they have served at least 26 years of detention”. This was established by the Constitutional Court because “the absolute preclusion is intrinsically unreasonable in light of the principle established by Article 27, third paragraph, of the Constitution, according to which the penalties ‘must tend to the re-education of the convicted person’”. The Constitutional Court affirmed this in sentence no. 149 filed today (rapporteur Francesco Vigano), with which it declared article 58 quater, paragraph 4, of law no. 354/1975 on the penitentiary system unconstitutional where it applies to those sentenced to life imprisonment for the two “obstacle crimes” provided for by Articles 630 and 289 bis of the penal code. The issue was raised by the Surveillance Court of Venice, to which a prisoner sentenced to life imprisonment for kidnapping with intent to extort and murder of the victim had asked to be granted access to the semi-liberty regime having spent more than 20 years in prison, where he had meritoriously engaged in work and study activities. First of all, the constitutional judges held that the rule unduly subverted the logic of progression with which, according to the current penitentiary system, a prisoner sentenced to life imprisonment must be helped to reintegrate into society, through benefits that gradually attenuate the prison regime, encouraging increasingly intense contacts with the outside of prison. As a rule, in fact, after having served 10 years of his sentence, the prisoner, if he shows active participation in the re-education program, can benefit from the first reward permits and can be authorized to leave prison for the time strictly necessary to carry out work activities outside the prison walls. If these first experiences are successful, after 20 years the “common” lifer can be admitted to the semi-liberty regime, which allows him to spend the day outside the prison and return during the night; and after 26 years, if he has given proof of certain repentance, he can finally access conditional release. The rule now declared illegitimate – with reference only to those sentenced to life imprisonment for the crimes considered – instead flattened the possibility of accessing all these benefits to the single and undifferentiated time threshold of 26 years, thus preventing the judge from evaluating the gradual progress of the convicted person in his path of social reintegration.