Times of need can make anyone do things they normally wouldn't, leading to some harsh consequences. In Italy, however, if food is stolen because of hunger and homelessness, it cannot be considered a crime, according to the country's highest appeals court.
The decision was reported by ANSA, an Italian news agency. The case in question was a page straight out of Les Misérables: a homeless Ukrainian man was charged with stealing cheese and sausage from a store without paying.
Roman Ostriakov was caught when another customer reported him to the store's management after seeing him trying to leave the establishment with the cheese and sausage in his pocket. The Ukrainian apparently only paid for some breadsticks. He was sentenced to six months in prison by a trial court in February 2015. He also had to pay a fine of about $115.
Italy's Cassation Court, however, ruled that stealing small amounts of food is not a crime when it is done to address the essential need for nourishment.
"The condition of the defendant and the circumstances in which the merchandise theft took place prove that he ... [was] acting therefore in a state of need," said the court.
According to a former member of the Cassation Court, Gherardo Colombo, the ruling appears to be based on "Ad impossibilia nemo tenetur," an Italian legal doctrine that translates to "No one is expected to do the impossible." The court has yet to release a statement offering its full reasoning for the decision.
Unlike in the U.S. legal system, the high court's decision does not necessarily have to be followed by lower courts. This case, however, can push for the more frequent application of state of necessity to cases linked to poverty conditions.
Italians are split on the decision as some believe that right to property has been trumped by right to survival. Colombo believes the Cassation Court ruled rightly though, saying that everyone has a legal right to dignity under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Italian Constitution.
He also reiterated that it was important to note that the theft was nonviolent. Had Ostriakov committed robbery instead, he would be facing a far less kind response from the Cassation Court.
Photo: Erich Ferdinand | Flickr
