Illicit trafficking in influence and the Nordio Reform: the requirement of corruptive intent

1. The facts

   The legal case culminating in the Cassation ruling stems from a complex investigation into alleged illicit lobbying activities aimed at influencing public procurement contracts of ANAS S.p.A. According to reports from news outlets such as Il Sole 24 Ore, Ansa, and Il Fatto Quotidiano, the case centers on Denis Verdini and several consultants associated with a consulting firm. The original prosecution theory alleged a scheme in which fictitious or inflated consulting contracts were used to remunerate the defendants' ability to influence the management of the contracting authority in favor of specific contractors. Following the initial precautionary measures that upheld the prosecution's case under the previous statutory wording, the Court of Cassation vacated the review order issued in the precautionary phase and remanded the case. The current procedural stage requires the Court of Rome (Review Section) to re-evaluate the facts in light of the Nordio Reform to determine whether the alleged conduct still constitutes an offense under the redefined statute.

2. 

   The rules at play

   The core of the legal debate centers on Article 346-bis of the Criminal Code, which was significantly amended by Law no. 114/2024. Previously, the provision penalized the exploitation of existing relationships for illicit mediation in general terms, even when aimed at obtaining a non-pecuniary advantage. Under the reform, the legislature introduced three restrictive essential elements:

   1. Corruptive purpose: mediation is punishable only if intended to induce a public official to perform an act contrary to official duties or to omit an official act (Articles 319 and 319-ter of the Criminal Code).
   2. Economic utility: the advantage given or promised to the mediator must be of a strictly financial nature, excluding political or career favors.
   3. Onerous mediation: an agreement for economic consideration in exchange for influence is required. Article 2 of the Criminal Code governs the temporal application of these provisions, enforcing the principle of lex mitior and resulting in a partial abolitio criminis for prior acts that no longer satisfy the updated statutory elements.

3. What the case law says

   The case law of the Supreme Court has historically oscillated between the early protection of the Public Administration's impartiality and the need to avoid criminalizing transparent lobbying activities. Prior to the reform, the prevailing view classified trafficking in influence as a crime of abstract endangerment, punishable even if the mediation targeted a lawful act, provided it was conducted opaquely. However, in its recent decision, the Supreme Court clarified that the new statutory framework requires a significantly stricter specific intent. The Court emphasized that proving the sale or agreement for influence is no longer sufficient; the prosecution must establish that the influence was specifically intended to facilitate a corruption offense. This interpretative shift transforms the crime from a broad safeguard of the public function's standing into an auxiliary offense linked to actual corruption crimes, decriminalizing conduct that, even if ethically questionable, does not seek the violation of official duties.

5. Analysis drafted and verified with edit.legal

   To verify the provisions cited in this article, we used edit.legal. Test our legal AI on official sources and apply it to your own matters.

   Try edit.legal AI

8. What it teaches professionals

   1. Assessment of the targeted act: defense counsel must carefully evaluate the lawfulness of the administrative act involved, as the compliance of the target act with applicable law excludes the statutory elements of the offense.
   2. Analysis of the consideration: it is essential to document the exact nature of the performance, distinguishing between traceable economic assets and purely relational or political benefits, which are no longer criminally actionable.
   3. Defense applications in pending proceedings: defense attorneys should promptly evaluate applications for the discharge of precautionary measures or appeals based on partial abolitio criminis resulting from the updated text of Article 346-bis of the Criminal Code.
   4. Enhancement of compliance programs: corporations should update their organizational models under Legislative Decree 231/2001 to ensure that lobbying and representation activities are properly documented in line with transparency standards.

References: Art. 346-bis c.p.Legge 114/2024Art. 2 c.p.Art. 319 c.p.Art. 319-ter c.p.Cass. Pen. n. 38714/2024

Editorial oversight: Avv. Federico Papa·ICAMUpdated 27 October 2026Content drafted with AI support and subject to editorial source checks. Despite these controls, inaccuracies may remain: reports and rectification requests are welcome. Report a correction