In deciding on the application of a special preventive measure because of the social dangerousness of the targeted person, the Court of Palermo reputed it had not a duty to conform to the principles laid down in the judgment of the ECHR Court on the case de Tommaso v. Italy (Grand Chamber, 23 February 2017). This, because the Grand Chamber did not delivered, on that occasion, a pilot judgment nor the judgment was an expression of a well-established interpretation of the ECHR by the ECHR Court.
Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights, Grand Chamber, 23 February 2017, de Tommaso v. Italy; Decree of the Court of Milan, Autonomous Section on Preventive Measures, No. 13 of 7 March 2017; Order of the Court of Appeal of Naples, VIII Criminal Section, 15 March 201; Decree of the Court of Palermo, I Criminal Section – measures of prevention, 28 March 2017; Decree of the Court of Rome, Preventive Measures Section, No. 30 of 3 April 2017; Order of the Court of Udine, Criminal Section, 4 April 201; Decision of the Court of Cassation, United Criminal Sections, No. 40076 of 27 Avril 2017; Decree of the Court of Palermo, I Criminal Section – preventive measures, 16-29 May 2017; Order of the Court of Cassation, II Criminal Section, No. 49194 of 25 October 2017