#interdictory order #antimafia: Attorney Marco Farinella of Baccaredda Boy Law Firm, reports on a recent judgment by the Supreme Court (Cass., section VI, 11 January 2022 – 14 April 2022, no. 14731), which provides some useful insights on how to access funds allocated by the so-called #decretosostegni (stimulus package).
The recipient of the criticized preventive seizure decree had been investigated for the crime of “undue receipt of public funds” provided for by art. 316-ter of the penal code, for receiving the aforementioned aid, failing to declare to be the recipient of an anti-mafia interdictory order. The Supreme Court, upholding the only ground of appeal formulated by the defendant’s counsel, stated that the subjective scope of the foreclosure provided for by art. 67 of legislative decree no. 159/2011 – which the Decreto Sostegni (stimulus package decree) refers to among the conditions impeding the submittal of the application – concerns the recipients of a definitive provision, whereby one of the preventive measures provided for by book I, title I, chapter II of the legislative decree no. 159/2011 applies. Since the anti-mafia interdictory order is not one of the preventive measures provided for therein, the defendant could still be eligible for the aforementioned state aid.