Abstract

In a modern reflection on punishment, some instances and impulses that are sometimes ambiguous and conflicting with each other must be taken into account: the need to respond to the crime; the reintegration of the sphere of the injured party and the victim; the protection of the fundamental guarantees of the person even if the author of a criminal offense; the even symbolic value of the sanction with a repressive function and with a view to general and special prevention. In our constitutional system, the balance point between the opposing instances of legality and proportionality of the penalty lies in the principle of individualization that must accompany the entire punitive dynamic. Therefore, the judge who affirms the responsibility of a person must graduate the sanction, in compliance with the legal framework, taking into account the type of crime, the individual guilt ,and the resulting response needs, always aiming at reintegration. Once the sentence has become irrevocable and its effective expiation has begun, the rehabilitation function and the project of social reintegration of the offender must prevail over any other need, modulated on the basis of the evolution of his personality.