The obligation to codify enforced disappearance as an autonomous offence under domestic criminal legislation is well established in international law and jurisprudence, and it responds to the need to adequately comprehend and address the extraordinarily complex nature of this crime. Yet very few states abide by such an obligation. When called upon to explain this failure, those lacking a separate offence in their domestic legislation — including Italy — argue that other offences (e.g. kidnapping, abduction, torture, or illegal deprivation of liberty) are adequate. The article analyses the Italian experience with investigations and proceedings conducted in the absence of an autonomous offence of enforced disappearance. They concern enforced disappearances perpetrated in the context of the Operación Cóndor in Latin America where the victims were Italian nationals, requests for extradition concerning cases that amount to enforced disappearance, and enforced disappearances committed in the realm of operations of ‘extraordinary renditions’. The consequences of the lack of criminalization of enforced disappearance include the undue fragmentation of responsibility when pressing charges; challenges concerning the evidentiary criteria, especially with regard to the mental element; the application of tight statutes of limitation; and the failure to adequately implement the aut dedere aut judicare principle, ultimately resulting in an increased rate of impunity.

中文翻译：

---

国内缺乏对强迫失踪进行刑事定罪的后果

将强迫失踪作为国内刑事立法中的一项独立罪行编纂为国际法和判例的义务已在国际法和判例中得到充分确立，它回应了充分理解和解决这一罪行极其复杂的性质的需要。然而，很少有国家遵守这样的义务。当被要求解释这一失败时，那些在其国内立法中缺乏单独罪行的国家——包括意大利——争辩说其他罪行（例如绑架、诱拐、酷刑或非法剥夺自由）就足够了。这篇文章分析了意大利在没有强迫失踪自主罪的情况下进行调查和诉讼的经验。它们涉及在拉丁美洲的“神鹰行动”中发生的强迫失踪，受害者是意大利国民，涉及强迫失踪案件的引渡请求，以及在“非常规引渡”行动领域实施的强迫失踪。没有对强迫失踪进行刑事定罪的后果包括在提出指控时过度分散责任；关于证据标准的挑战，特别是在心理因素方面；严格的诉讼时效的适用；以及未能充分执行引渡或起诉原则，最终导致有罪不罚率上升。以及在“非常规引渡”行动领域犯下的强迫失踪。没有对强迫失踪进行刑事定罪的后果包括在提出指控时过度分散责任；关于证据标准的挑战，特别是在心理因素方面；严格的诉讼时效的适用；以及未能充分执行引渡或起诉原则，最终导致有罪不罚率上升。以及在“非常规引渡”行动领域犯下的强迫失踪。没有对强迫失踪进行刑事定罪的后果包括在提出指控时过度分散责任；关于证据标准的挑战，特别是在心理因素方面；严格的诉讼时效的适用；以及未能充分执行引渡或起诉原则，最终导致有罪不罚率上升。严格的诉讼时效的适用；以及未能充分执行引渡或起诉原则，最终导致有罪不罚率上升。严格的诉讼时效的适用；以及未能充分执行引渡或起诉原则，最终导致有罪不罚率上升。