Il Re Dei Criminali Full Movie In Italian Free Download Hd
Alke Stilwell
The Italian legal system is that of a civil law State, governed by codified law. The first and initial code in the Italian Republic was established by the Fascist Government in 1930 and was kept until 1988. This code adopted an inquisitorial system.
Since 1989, the trial is supposed to be party-dominated and strictly separated from the pre-trial process (investigations).It is the parties who present lists of evidence to be taken, and it is they who examine and cross-examine witnesses. But the judge can strike manifestly superfluous witnesses from the list, reject irrelevant lines of questioning, ask witnesses and experts additional questions, and can even, "if absolutely necessary", order additional evidence to be taken.
The supposed strict separation between pre-trial investigations and trial proceedings has not survived the very first years after the reform of the Italian criminal process: the law and the jurisprudence of the courts have since permitted the introduction of pre-trial statements under more and more liberal rules.If the Judge of the Trial is convinced beyond all reasonable doubt the defendant is guilty, the Judge must convict him; if not, the Judge must acquit. The Judge must also publish written explanations of his decisions.It is important to note that Italy does not try anybody by a jury of peers: the sentence is written and the verdict (and ) is decided by the judge himself (serious offenses have a 3-headed court of judges, or a 2-headed court of judges and 6 jurors).The parties can appeal against the sentence before the Court of Appeal (which rules on the merits again, usually without gathering any other evidence) and even before the Supreme Court (Corte di Cassazione).
According to the system provided for by italian Constitution (Sects. 104-105), public prosecutors belong to the judiciary and are independent of any other powers; particularly the public prosecutor is not a representative of the Executive to the judiciary.
According to the Constitution (Sect. 112), the prosecutor is under an obligation to take action in criminal cases, whenever there is sufficient evidence (reasonable cause) to charge a person with having committed an offence.
As a result, the principle of legality strictly rules and no discretion is allowed to the prosecutor: once an offence has been reported, the prosecutor has no choice on whether to start proceedings or not, nor can he suspend or withdraw the action, whic must always end in a judicial decision.
According to the legality principle, all reported offences are registered in the official records and proceedings are formally started for each of them; but the prosecutor in fact decides at his discretion which offences have to be promptly investigated and which ? in contrast ? will be dealt with only later.
When the public prosecutor is notified of a crime, s/he is obliged to start the preliminary investigation and ? if perpetrator is known ? s/he has to enter the name of suspect in a dedicated register (Art. 335 Italian criminal procedure code).
However, the judge for the prelimianry investigations does not have control of the investigation; on the contrary, he is a mere judge ad acta involved only in specific events at the request of the parties (usually the prosecutor); the trial judge is not presented with all of the typical information gathered by police and prosecutors during the investigation (e.g., witness statements).
Under italian criminal procedure the whole investigation process is carried out under the supervision of the prosecutor, who disposes of criminal police. The police itself has autonomy only in the very first stage of investigation, until the prosecutor has been noticed. After prosecutors? intervention, the police carries out delegated activity (with some limited exceptions).
After having performed the investigation, the public prosecutor decides if the suspected, in the meaning of indagato which means under investigations, has to face the trial in the different forms provided by criminal procedure.
i. Fraudulent tax return through the use of invoices or other documents concerning fictitious transactions (Section 2 of Legislative Decree No. 74/2000). Such crime punishes whoever, in order to evade income tax or value added tax, using invoices or other documents for fictitious transactions, indicates fictitious taxable elements in the tax return.
ii. Fraudulent tax return through other fraudulent means (Section 3 of Legislative Decree No. 74/2000). Such crime punishes whoever, in order to evade income tax or value added tax, by carrying out objectively or subjectively fake transactions or by using fake documents or other fraudulent means capable of hindering the assessment and misleading the tax authorities, indicates in one of these tax returns positive items for an amount lower than the actual amount, or fictitious credits, or fictitious withholding taxes, when, jointly:
iii. Issuance of invoices or other documents for fictitious transactions (Section 8 of Legislative Decree 74/2000). Such crime punishes whoever, in order to allow third parties to evade income tax or value added tax, issues invoices or other documents for fictitious transactions.
iv. Concealment or destruction of accounting documents (Section 10 of Legislative Decree 74/2000). Such crime punishes whoever, in order to evade income or value added tax, or to allow the evasion to third parties, conceals or destroys all or part of the accounting records or documents that must be kept, in order to obstacle the assessment of income or turnover.
vi. False tax return (Section 4 of Legislative Decree No. 74/2000). Such crime punishes whoever, in order to evade income or value added tax, fails to indicate positive items in the tax return when, jointly:
vii. Omitted tax return (Section 5 of Legislative Decree No. 74/2000). Such crime punishes whoever, in order to evade income, value added tax or withholding taxes, fails to file a tax return, provided that the unpaid tax is higher than EUR 50,000.
A criminal investigation can start either as a result of a tax audit of the Italian tax authority (Agenzia delle Entrate) or the Italian tax police (Guardia di Finanza) or as a result of an autonomous initiative of the Italian Public Prosecutor.
In general terms, it is very common that tax audits into large taxpayers result in criminal investigations. This because, pursuant to Italian law, certain tax evasion conducts are criminalized even in the absence of a fraudulent behavior, if some (low) thresholds of tax evasion are exceeded. This happens in almost all cases where the Italian tax authority or the Italian tax police assess an undeclared permanent establishment of a non-Italian company, which entails a criminal investigation for omitted tax return.
In case of transfer pricing assessments, the preparation of transfer pricing documentation compliant with Italian transfer pricing regulation generally prevents criminal investigations into the taxpayer.
No, because the tax and criminal proceedings are two separate proceedings that, at least from a pure technical perspective, are not intermingled. Criminal proceedings are triggered because of tax criminal law provisions, irrespective of any tax penalty that may be imposed under tax law.
Filing spontaneously an amended tax return before the initiation of a criminal proceedings may, in some cases, prevent the initiation of criminal proceedings for certain tax crimes. A full payment of tax is required.
The prosecutor can prosecute tax crimes on their own initiative. However, most criminal proceedings for tax crimes arise from the initiative of Italian Tax Authority / Italian Tax Police, because of tax audits conducted by them into the taxpayer. The Italian Tax Authority / Italian Tax Police report all the findings identified during the tax audit in a tax audit report, which is subsequently transmitted to the prosecutor.
As a matter of fact, the prosecutor, in carrying out preliminary investigations, relies in the majority of cases exclusively on the tax audit report / tax assessments and, only in a limited number of cases, carries out additional investigations.
i. Fraudulent tax return through the use of invoices or other documents concerning fictitious transactions (Section 2 of Legislative Decree No. 74/2000): 10 years and 8 months - 13 years and 4 months in case of in case of interrupting acts (for crimes committed after October 19, 2021, the first degree sentence - in case of conviction - permanently interrupts the course of the statute of limitations. Nevertheless, in the event of a declaration of annulment leading to the regression of the proceedings to the first instance or to an earlier stage, the statute of limitations starts to run again from the date of the final judgment of annulment).
ii. Fraudulent tax return through other fraudulent means (Section 3 of Legislative Decree No. 74/2000): 10 years and 8 months - 13 years and 4 months in case of in case of interrupting acts (for crimes committed after October 19, 2021, the first degree sentence - in case of conviction - permanently interrupts the course of the statute of limitations. Nevertheless, in the event of a declaration of annulment leading to the regression of the proceedings to the first instance or to an earlier stage, the statute of limitations starts to run again from the date of the final judgment of annulment).
iii. Issuance of invoices or other documents for fictitious transactions (Section 8 of Legislative Decree 74/2000): 10 years and 8 months - 13 years and 4 months in case of in case of interrupting acts (for crimes committed after October 19, 2021, the first degree sentence - in case of conviction - permanently interrupts the course of the statute of limitations. Nevertheless, in the event of a declaration of annulment leading to the regression of the proceedings to the first instance or to an earlier stage, the statute of limitations starts to run again from the date of the final judgment of annulment).
7fc3f7cf58