Vittime di caporalato e incidente probatorio: aporie sistemiche di una disciplina a geometria variabile

This article embarks on a meticulous critique of the legal framework governing the acquisition of statements from ‘vulnerable’ victims in cases of illicit intermediation and labor exploitation during special evidentiary hearings. The Author initially sketches the historical evolution of the relevant legislation, before delving into the procedural nuances for gathering statements from victims requiring enhanced protective measures (Article 392(1-bis) of the Italian Code of Criminal Procedure). The analysis critically underscores a significant lacuna in the aforementioned Code – it does not presume vulnerability for victims of this crime, necessitating case-by-case assessments by public prosecutors, defense attorneys, or judges to ascertain such a characteristic for evidentiary purposes. This additional procedural requirement stands in stark contrast to the iuris et de iure presumed vulnerability for analogous crimes, potentially precipitating constitutional discrepancies with the principle of equality. The Author notably critiques the Italian legislator’s ‘catalog-based norm-setting’, which has unduly narrowed the scope of presumed vulnerability, thereby sidelining the victims of illicit intermediation and labor exploitation. To remedy these legislative shortcomings, the Author posits several corrective measures, suggesting an overhaul that would realign the legal approach with the principle of equality and comprehensive victim protection.