12 Apr recycling and self-laundering

Among the crimes against the most common heritage include recycling and self -mirroring - two extremely similar terms that could lead to an erroneous overlap, Especially because they are also placed in adjacent positions in the Italian penal code.
Actually, they refer to two cases of very different crime, that we will try to highlight clearly and for information in this brief study, In order to avoid possible interpretative confusions.
The crime of recycling can be defined as all the set of operations conducted in order to "wash" money, assets or other utilities obtained illegally so as to make all the criminal origin lose any trace.
It is an expected crime and governed by the Italian penal code (art. 648-to) and punishes those who "cleaned up" the money, the assets or other utilities mentioned above in order to hinder the identification of their real origin.
Among the typical examples of recycling include the payment of the checks on the current account result of scams or the movement of a stolen asset in foreign territory non -EU citizens, where it will be relocated to the market. So here we are faced with a criminal conduct that, through the investment of goods or capital from illegal activities, provides for their transformation into assets or capital apparently (and again) lawful.
It is also important to remember that the crime of recycling is made up of some typical pipes, as highlighted by article 648-bis of the penal code:
• Replacement: Illegal proceeds are exchanged or transformed, such as in the case of purchase of preciously obtained through a theft.
• transfer: It is to be understood as a legally appreciable translation between different subjects; For example in the case of change of heading of a title, a vehicle or property.
• Other operations: intended as all the conduct aimed at making impossible the identification of the real origin of money or good.
The penal code punishes those responsible for the crime of recycling with the fine from 5000 a 25.000 euro and with imprisonment from four up to twelve years. These penalties can also be tightened where the crime is committed in the context of a professional activity.
The self -laundering is defined as the illegal activity aimed at dismissed in concrete way assets or income obtained illegally, so as to make it impossible to trace them - or at least connect them to any criminal activities from which they come.
At first glance, it would seem in all respects an identical description to that relating to recycling. Actually, There is a subtle but substantial difference between these two cases of crime: In the case of the autoical officer, The individual who recycles is also the author of the crime from which the goods or money come.
Furthermore, The crime of self -laundering has been introduced in Italian legislation in much more recent times than recycling, and specifically with the law 186 of the 15 December 2014 ("Provisions on the emergence and return of capital held abroad as well as for the strengthening of the fight against tax evasion. Provisions on self -marketing "). The goal, how easy it is to guess, it is to sanction those who self-travel the proceeds obtained by the criminal activities that have directly conducted.
As for the expected penalties, it will refer from the regulatory point of view to article 648-ter 1 of the criminal code which thus establishes in the first paragraph: “The penalty of imprisonment from two to eight years is applied and of the fine from Euro 5.000 euro 25.000 To anyone, 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 exception to punishment is linked to the possible use of goods for mere personal enjoyment, since in this way their reuse goes to decide in order to hinder their identification.
As already highlighted, The main similarity consists in the "cleaning" activities of the good obtained illegally in order to make it complex - if not impossible - the connection with the crime that originated it. The legal assets subject to the recycling activities are therefore the same as the auto -aging operations, as well as the objective element.
The substantial difference is instead relating to the author of the conduct: In the case of the autoical officer, This is in fact the person who commits the crime, derives money or goods as a result of its criminal conduct, and then proceeds to "clean them" (For example, reinvesting economically a sum of money, or by interacting an asset to another subject).
In the case of recycling, instead, the author of the crime-president-that is the criminal action that is, in fact, The conditio sine qua not because the crime of recycling is then committed - and the one who works to prevent the good or money thus obtained from being traced or traced back to the illicit activity are two different individuals.