27 Jul self laundering

Anyone commits the crime of self-laundering, having committed or contributed to committing a non-negligent crime, employs, substitute, transfers, in economic activities, financial, entrepreneurial or speculative, money, the goods or other benefits deriving from the commission of this crime, in order to concretely hinder the identification of their criminal origin. The rationale for self-laundering, for how the rule is configured, results in avoiding pollution of the legal economy and, then, to sanction the perpetrator of the alleged crime who self-launders the proceeds of the crime previously committed. Recently introduced into our order (l. 186/2014), self-laundering is a crime committed by the person who employs it, substitute, moves into economic activities, financial, entrepreneurial or speculative, money, goods or other benefits that derive from the commission of a non-negligent crime, in order to concretely hinder the identification of their criminal origin.
The Legislator has therefore configured self-laundering as a crime: multi-offensive: the law codifies a crime which, in addition to assets, protects other legal assets such as the administration of justice, public order, the economic-financial order; own: the crime can only be committed by the perpetrator of the predicate crime or by the participant in the same, unlike common crimes that can be committed by anyone; whose conduct must be suitable in practice to hinder the identification of the criminal origin of the assets. As clearly stated by the device, the conduct consists in employment, in replacement, in the transfer of money into economic activities, goods or other benefits of illicit origin, so as to hinder identification, by someone who has committed the same underlying crime or by a competitor in the same. However, the conduct of someone who is limited to mere use or mere personal enjoyment is not punishable. We are therefore faced with a rule that aims to avoid and discourage inconsistent behavior in the legal economy, sanctioning the perpetrator of the alleged crime, who self-launders the proceeds of the crime he has previously committed. In fact, it is not lost on us that the resources obtained through the alleged crime are often invested in legitimate economic activities. So, a real potential pollution occurs in the legal economy. Generic intent constitutes a subjective element of the crime of self-laundering. The acting subject must in fact have the conscience and the will to employ, to replace or transfer into economic activities, financial, entrepreneurial or speculative, money, goods or other benefits that derive from the commission of a non-negligent crime that was previously committed. As far as the objective element is concerned, it is necessary, for the purposes of criminal punishment, that the activities carried out have the characteristic of being suitable to concretely hinder the identification of the criminal origin of the goods or other benefits. The reference to the adverb concretely does not seem to be casual. According to widely prevalent jurisprudential orientation, indeed, the legislator would have used this term to be able to outline conduct that has a clear dissimulating capacity. So, conduct that only "slowed down" the procedure for identifying the illicit origin of the goods would not be criminally relevant. Self-laundering is evidently an instant crime. While, in essence, it can be admitted that the conduct that constitutes the crime is carried out in multiple ways and at different times. However, in this case, only some of them will integrate the case we are talking about in today's analysis. Moreover, It is not lost on us how a different analysis may arise depending on the moment of the commission of the crime, if this is achieved with multiple pipelines. The crime has in fact been in force in our system only since 1 January 2015. So, if the first act of reuse of the sums occurs after this date, and it continued over time, consumption should coincide with the date of the last reuse with the capacity to hinder the illicit origin. It is clear and of particular importance to remember how identifying with certainty the moment of the commission of the crime is also of interest in order to be able to calculate the starting date of the statute of limitations. In this context, we underline that according to the general rules of the art. 157 c.p., which can be used in this case of crime, the crime is extinguished after the time corresponding to the maximum statutory penalty established by law has elapsed.