News · Criminal law · – 25 September 2026
With judgment no. 154 of 2026, the Corte costituzionale (Italian Constitutional Court) declared unfounded the questions raised on art. 162-ter, fourth paragraph, c.p., which excludes atti persecutori (stalking) from the extinction of the offence through reparative conduct (estinzione del reato per condotte riparatorie). For stalking, absent a valid remissione della querela (withdrawal of the criminal complaint), full compensation does not bring the proceedings to an end.
The framework. The judgment, filed on 25 September 2026, decides the incidental constitutional proceedings brought by the GIP (preliminary investigations judge) of the Tribunale di Reggio Emilia (register of referral orders no. 14 of 2026) with reference to art. 3 of the Constitution. In the giudizio abbreviato (abbreviated trial), the injured party had accepted the sum offered while disputing its adequacy, had refused to withdraw the complaint and had opposed the extinction of the offence.
Art. 162-ter c.p., introduced by art. 1, paragraph 1, of Law no. 103 of 2017, provides that the court, having heard the parties and the injured party, shall declare extinguished an offence prosecutable upon querela (criminal complaint) where the complaint may be withdrawn, if the defendant, by the declaration opening the first-instance trial, has fully repaired the harm, through restitution or compensation, and has eliminated, where possible, the harmful or dangerous consequences of the offence. If the court considers the reparation to be complete, including by way of an offerta reale (formal tender of payment) that was refused but adequate, extinction operates even against the wishes of the injured party. The fourth paragraph, added by art. 1, paragraph 2, of Law no. 172 of 2017, excludes the cases under art. 612-bis c.p.
The Court’s reasoning. Grounds for extinguishing an offence fall within the broad discretion of the legislature, including with regard to individual offences. The fact that stalking is prosecutable upon complaint does not signal lesser seriousness; rather, it protects the victim’s privacy. Stalking is a habitual offence requiring a harmful result (reato abituale e di evento): extinction through unilateral reparation, without any assessment of its deterrent effect, would leave the victim exposed to repetition of the conduct. The Court also points to the escalation from the “reato-spia” (sentinel offence) to crimes of bloodshed. The comparison with art. 612-ter c.p. is not apposite: that offence protects sexual privacy, may be committed through a single act and does not require any psychological harm as its result.
In practice.
Defence of the accused. Full compensation before trial remains relevant as a mitigating circumstance under art. 62, no. 6, c.p. However, the sospensione condizionale della pena (suspended sentence) is always conditional upon participation, with a favourable outcome, in specific rehabilitation programmes (art. 165, fifth paragraph, c.p.).
Withdrawal of the complaint. It may be made only within the proceedings; it is excluded where the offence is committed through repeated threats in the manner described in art. 612, second paragraph, c.p., and it has no effect where the offence is prosecutable ex officio: among other cases, where the victim is a minor or a person with a disability, where the offence is connected with another offence prosecutable ex officio, or where the offender has already received a formal warning from the questore (provincial chief of police) under art. 8 of d.l. no. 11 of 2009, even if the injured party is a different person.
Giustizia riparativa (restorative justice). There are no bars based on the type of offence, but referral to the restorative justice Centre is ordered by the judicial authority (during the preliminary investigations, the pubblico ministero, i.e. the public prosecutor), which assesses its usefulness and the absence of concrete risks (art. 129-bis c.p.p.). A restorative outcome is relevant under art. 62, no. 6, c.p., provided that any behavioural undertakings are complied with.
Injured party. Accepting a sum of money neither extinguishes the offence nor amounts to a withdrawal of the complaint.
Frequently asked questions.
Does compensation extinguish the offence of stalking?
No: the Court held that the exclusion of art. 612-bis from art. 162-ter c.p. is reasonable.
So is paying compensation pointless?
No: it may count as a mitigating circumstance, but it remains distinct from the withdrawal of the complaint.
Summary note by the CommercialistiAvvocati network, based on specialised legal and practice sources. The text does not reproduce original contributions and does not constitute professional advice.