Abstract

Starting from the methdological assumption according to which, in penal law, a higher degree of predictability of jurisdictional decisions can be obtained by the identification of one direction orienting the interpreter, in this work a different interpretation criterion is suggested, which is more or less flexible, according to the kind of "in bonam" or "in malam partem" hermeneutical conclusion. The flexibility of interpretation admitted in a positive sense, gives way to a metatextual hermeneutics being useful for solving antinomies and filling the axiological gaps with the first-best rules. This research, in conclusion, calls for such 'strabismus' of interpretation, which does not compromises the certainty of the penal law if it is adjusted by the univocal hermeneutical direction.