This site uses technical and third-party cookies to improve your browsing experience. Learn more

    Legal Aid Defence Method

    In proceedings relating to crimes against the public administration, the defence requires a technical and multidisciplinary approach, capable of integrating criminal analysis, administrative reconstruction and assessment of the economic dynamics that characterise relations between private operators and the public administration.

    Our defence method

    In proceedings relating to crimes against the public administration, the defence requires a technical and multidisciplinary approach, capable of integrating criminal analysis, administrative reconstruction and assessment of the economic dynamics that characterise relations between private operators and the public administration.

    The defence activity is based on the reconstruction of the administrative and contractual dynamics that led to the contested decision, the analysis of the public decision-making process and the verification of the actual existence of an illicit agreement between the parties. Also central is the critical scrutiny of the evidence collected by the investigative bodies, in order to verify the correct legal qualification of the facts.

    In corporate criminal law, particular importance is given to the distinction between legitimate interaction with the public administration — a natural feature of relations between businesses and institutions — and conduct actually capable of constituting corrupt offences or undue interference in the exercise of public functions.

    In this area, the activity of Studio Legal Aid is aimed at providing a technical defence based on the systematic reconstruction of the relations between economic activity and public functions, with the objective of ensuring respect for the principles of typicality, harmfulness and culpability that govern criminal proceedings.

    Frequently asked questions about Crimes against the Public Administration

    What are the main crimes against the public administration relevant to businesses?
    The main offences are corruption for the exercise of functions (Art. 318), corruption for an act contrary to official duties (Art. 319), extortion by a public official (Art. 317), undue induction (Art. 319-quater), illicit influence peddling (Art. 346-bis), embezzlement (Art. 314) and abuse of office (Art. 323). In corporate criminal law, these offences assume importance when they arise in relations between economic operators and public officials.
    What is the difference between extortion by a public official and undue induction?
    Extortion (Art. 317) arises when the public official compels the private party with coercive conduct leaving no real alternative, making the private party the victim. Undue induction (Art. 319-quater) occurs when the official exerts less intense pressure, leaving the private party a margin of self-determination; in this case, the private party is also punishable.
    Can crimes against the public administration entail entity liability under Legislative Decree 231/2001?
    Yes, crimes against the public administration are among the predicate offences of Legislative Decree 231/2001. When unlawful conduct is committed in the interest or to the advantage of the entity, the company may be subject to significant pecuniary sanctions and interdictory measures such as suspension of activity and prohibition on contracting with the public administration.
    What is illicit influence peddling?
    Illicit influence peddling (Article 346-bis of the Criminal Code) punishes those who, claiming existing or apparent relations with a public official, seek or are given benefits in exchange for exercising such influence. Unlike corruption, it does not require a direct agreement with the public official. The defence verifies the actual claimed capacity for influence, the effective realisation of the conduct, and the distinction between lawful lobbying and criminally relevant conduct.
    How is a company defended against corruption charges in public procurement?
    In corruption proceedings related to public procurement, the defence of the entity and its director requires an in-depth analysis of how the contract was awarded, compliance of selection procedures, and documentation of relations with the public administration. It is essential to demonstrate the correctness of the procedural process and the absence of corrupt agreements, distinguishing normal commercial relations from criminally relevant conduct.

    Request a confidential consultation

    Every request is handled with the utmost discretion and professional confidentiality.

    All expertise areas