In judgment no. 34439/2026, filed on 24 September 2026, the Third Criminal Division of the Italian Supreme Court returned to the conditions for applying the so-called urban DASPO under Article 10(2) of Decree-Law no. 14/2017.

The case concerned a person convicted of breaching a ban on access to certain urban areas in the municipality of Maddaloni, imposed by the Questore of Caserta following repeated unauthorised parking-attendant activity.

The central issue was the lawfulness of the underlying administrative order and, in particular, the need for specific reasons establishing a danger to public safety.

The Supreme Court clarified that mere repetition of the conduct referred to in Article 9 of Decree-Law no. 14/2017 is not sufficient, by itself, to justify the access ban. Article 10(2) requires an additional and autonomous condition: the actual conduct must be capable of creating a danger to safety.

Expressly referring to Constitutional Court judgment no. 47/2024, the Court stated that “safety” must be interpreted restrictively, as protecting citizens’ freedom to carry out lawful activities free from possible criminal conduct.

It is therefore not enough that the person’s presence be regarded as incompatible with the decorum of the area, nor may the order be based on remote or conjectural risks.

The danger must emerge from the concrete manner in which the conduct was carried out, not merely from the recipient’s personality or the repetition of unlawful acts. Aggressive, threatening or persistently harassing behaviour, or conduct actually capable of preventing others from accessing and freely using public areas, may be relevant.

In the case examined, the Court of Appeal had inferred danger from the possibility that motorists who refused to pay the unauthorised parking attendant might become involved in disputes. The Supreme Court considered that reasoning seriously deficient: the possibility of disputes was purely hypothetical, whereas the law requires a concrete and individualised assessment of danger.

The Court also reiterated that the criminal court hearing a charge of breaching the ban, while it cannot replace the Questore’s discretionary assessment, must verify that the legal prerequisites for the administrative order existed, including a concrete danger to safety.

The judgment was therefore quashed and remitted to a different section of the Naples Court of Appeal for a fresh assessment of dangerousness.

Italian Supreme Court, Criminal Division III, judgment no. 34439/2026, hearing 16 September 2026, filed 24 September 2026.

Reference: Italian Constitutional Court no. 47/2024.