![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
fpbThe following is a faithful translation of an article in today's Italian newspaper LA REPUBBLICA:
ROME - Two teen-agers are in love, want each other, but to have some time alone is impossible. So they run away, if only for a little while, to have a bit of an adventure for themselves. In manyh parts of Italy it is a consolidated habit, which Sicilians call 'Fuitina,' "mini-escape". Up to now, this kind of adventure only involved relationships and feelings; but, from now on, they are going to hit the lad who takes the girl away in the pocket. Whether or not she consents, he is guilty of threatening family unity and has to pay good money for it - money, not apologies or repentances. It is money that compensates the parental unit for "having tried to break," with the condemnded fuitina, "the relationship of the underage female with her family".
This, word for word, is the sentence of the Corte di Cassazione (Court of last appeal), which establishes a precedent for a genuine "cost" charged on the Him in question, for the 'fuitina': even if arranged in a most modern fashion as a brief holiday incommunicado from Her's parents, a minor but fully consenting, the mini-elopement is an assault upon the family unit and unity.
The highest court of appeal confirmed the sentence for "consensual abduction of minor" against Giovanni C., a lad a few days above age, who, in 1997, arranged for his fiancee Angela P., 17, to spend a few days with him in a seaside resort in Marche (central Italy), instead of going back to her parents, who were waiting for her in a village on the Piave (North-East Italy).
No compulsion or deceit. Angela was of one mind with Giovanni, who had also roped in his brother Luciano to find the love-nest for the few days to pass with his beloved.
Now Daddy and Mommy did not like the matter at all, and, in spite of knowing Giovanni and his family and being fully aware of the relationship between the two, had no hesitation in laying criminal charges against Giovanni and even against his "accomplice" brother.
So the matter ended up in the court of Ancona (Marche) and then to the Court of Appeal. Giovanni and Luciano were condemned - the amount of the penalty is not known, but Giovanni had a higher one - and also ordered them to pay, immediately, a large unspecified sum "as provisional damages" to Angela's parents.
Giovanni tried in vain to argue in Cassazione that "it was groundless to maintain that he had removed Angela to parental power, this being merely a short holiday, agreed among teen-ages as a brief romantic episode, with no intention to destroy the relationship of the fully consenting girl with her family".
As for Angela's parents, Giovanni pointed out, to reduce his responsibility, that "they were aware of the bond he had with their daughter and hardly unaware of her wide freedom of decision".
But the Highest Court - sentence no. 43191 - declared his appeal "inadmissible" and found "the argument groundless". In brief, according to the judges of the Sixth Criminal Section, those days by the seaside, even if Angela was 17 and consenting, had an "illegitimate finality", pursued at the danger of the serene relationship between the girl and her family. Therefore Giovanni will now have to grit his teeth and open his wallet to pay for his 'fuitina', seven years ago. Jail, on the other hand, does not seem on the cards, since it is conditional.
The Cassazione's own deputy prosecutor general Gianluca Favalli had unexpectedly but unsuccessfully tried to have the relevant article of law (article 537 of the Italian Penal Code) declared unconstitutional; the Sixth Penal Section declined to consult the Constitutional Court (Translator's note: in Italy, the Supreme Court - Cassazione - and the Constitutional Court are separate entities), and decided that the 'fuitina' is still to be regarded as unlawful.
(20 novembre 2004)
ROME - Two teen-agers are in love, want each other, but to have some time alone is impossible. So they run away, if only for a little while, to have a bit of an adventure for themselves. In manyh parts of Italy it is a consolidated habit, which Sicilians call 'Fuitina,' "mini-escape". Up to now, this kind of adventure only involved relationships and feelings; but, from now on, they are going to hit the lad who takes the girl away in the pocket. Whether or not she consents, he is guilty of threatening family unity and has to pay good money for it - money, not apologies or repentances. It is money that compensates the parental unit for "having tried to break," with the condemnded fuitina, "the relationship of the underage female with her family".
This, word for word, is the sentence of the Corte di Cassazione (Court of last appeal), which establishes a precedent for a genuine "cost" charged on the Him in question, for the 'fuitina': even if arranged in a most modern fashion as a brief holiday incommunicado from Her's parents, a minor but fully consenting, the mini-elopement is an assault upon the family unit and unity.
The highest court of appeal confirmed the sentence for "consensual abduction of minor" against Giovanni C., a lad a few days above age, who, in 1997, arranged for his fiancee Angela P., 17, to spend a few days with him in a seaside resort in Marche (central Italy), instead of going back to her parents, who were waiting for her in a village on the Piave (North-East Italy).
No compulsion or deceit. Angela was of one mind with Giovanni, who had also roped in his brother Luciano to find the love-nest for the few days to pass with his beloved.
Now Daddy and Mommy did not like the matter at all, and, in spite of knowing Giovanni and his family and being fully aware of the relationship between the two, had no hesitation in laying criminal charges against Giovanni and even against his "accomplice" brother.
So the matter ended up in the court of Ancona (Marche) and then to the Court of Appeal. Giovanni and Luciano were condemned - the amount of the penalty is not known, but Giovanni had a higher one - and also ordered them to pay, immediately, a large unspecified sum "as provisional damages" to Angela's parents.
Giovanni tried in vain to argue in Cassazione that "it was groundless to maintain that he had removed Angela to parental power, this being merely a short holiday, agreed among teen-ages as a brief romantic episode, with no intention to destroy the relationship of the fully consenting girl with her family".
As for Angela's parents, Giovanni pointed out, to reduce his responsibility, that "they were aware of the bond he had with their daughter and hardly unaware of her wide freedom of decision".
But the Highest Court - sentence no. 43191 - declared his appeal "inadmissible" and found "the argument groundless". In brief, according to the judges of the Sixth Criminal Section, those days by the seaside, even if Angela was 17 and consenting, had an "illegitimate finality", pursued at the danger of the serene relationship between the girl and her family. Therefore Giovanni will now have to grit his teeth and open his wallet to pay for his 'fuitina', seven years ago. Jail, on the other hand, does not seem on the cards, since it is conditional.
The Cassazione's own deputy prosecutor general Gianluca Favalli had unexpectedly but unsuccessfully tried to have the relevant article of law (article 537 of the Italian Penal Code) declared unconstitutional; the Sixth Penal Section declined to consult the Constitutional Court (Translator's note: in Italy, the Supreme Court - Cassazione - and the Constitutional Court are separate entities), and decided that the 'fuitina' is still to be regarded as unlawful.
(20 novembre 2004)
