Order of the Court of Udine, Criminal Section, 4 April 2017

The Court of Udine raised a question of constitutional legitimacy concerning certain law provisions on special preventive measures (Articles 1, 3 e 5 of law No. 1423 of 1956 and Articles 1, 4.1.c, 6 and 8 od legislative decree No. 159 of 2011), seemingly inconsistent with the freedom of movement guaranteed by Article 2 of Protocol No. 4 to the ECHR. Unlike other Italian courts, the Tribunal deemed it necessary to take into consideration the internal effects of the decision of the ECHR Court on the case de Tommaso v. Italy (Grand Chamber, 23 February 2017). Although that case cannot be regarded as an expression of well-established ECHR Court’s jurisprudence, the fact that the relevant judgment was issued by the Grand Chamber is enough, for the Court of Udine, to make that Italian courts have an obligation to defer the question to the Constitutional Court for solution.