Dentro il castello dei destini incrociati: la responsabilità dell'ente da autoriciclaggio
Author(s)
Date Issued
2016
Type
article
Issue
1-2
Start Page
100
End Page
155
Abstract
The legislator does not seem to have calculated the theoretical and practical consequences of not having established a sub-list of predicate crimes upon which the crime of self-laundering, and, consequently, the liability of legal entities for self-laundering, can be based. Therefore, it is unavoidable for the interpret to ask whether the legal entity is held liable for self-laundering for whatever source-crime, regardless it is, in turn, a requirement of the liability ex legislative decree 231/2001, and face the possible answers. In order to reach such answers, rather than proceeding
in attempts within a system in need for rationality and order, he might perhaps rely on a research method that recalls the scientific-mathematical method of the “study of a function”. Such a legal-mathematical pathway allows to highlight, even graphically, how the liability of legal entities for
self-laundering can reach outcomes that are really irrational, other than conflicting with the principles upholding the “231 system”, whereas the source-crime is a crime out of the list or the self-laundering itself; crimes which, nevertheless, lacking any legislative indication, cannot but be considered belonging to the field of existence of the function “responsibility of legal entities for self-laundering”.