Il processo penale tardo romano: accusatorio o inquisitorio? Una minima proposta esegetica, su una questione da impostare correttamente

The brief note is meant to offer a proposal aimed to extricate the groovy sources on Roman later criminal procedure structure. It does not seek neither to thouroughly inquire into them nor to extensively discuss the state of art on that troublesome matter, as such investigation would require an entire monography or, at least, an extended essay, which cannot be submitted here. Thus, it is based on previous studies about the later Roman trial, led by its author. Set a distinction amongst the features of the inquisitory, on one hand, and, on the other hand, the bilateral criminal procedure (the last one meant to be the due process of law, according for instance to the Italian Constitution), the herein submitted note states that the complete shape of the procedure was not firmly predetermined by late Roman law, which regulated just single topics, not the overall procedure. As a matter of fact, an inquisitory procedure appears to be in place about felonies committed by public officers or that undermined state security. A bilateral procedure took place to prosecute felonies that just affected the victim, physically or in his/her goods: it was normally up to the victim not only to trigger the procedure but also to give evidence of the case, which could be withdrawn by him/ herself. In all further cases there were a softened inquisitory procedure, according to which the victim, everyone who had interest or especially public officials would have formally denounced the alleged culprit, binding themselves to be sentenced for calumny or to the same penalty foreseen for their false claim, should the culprit have been acquitted. Nonetheless they would not have played the role of prosecutors, since they would have dismissed their part on the issue after submission of the case into the court, which was accompanied by narratives and evidences for their claim