There has been much discussion as to whether supplementing the crime of false ideological instrument of fraud or failure to consummate the stamping by the public servant, at the CARD timepiece brief removal from the workplace.
The legitimacy of law is well-established view that the cards in timekeeping, once installed, constitute evidence of the presence of keepers in the workplace, in the time lag between the time of entry and time output, resulting in relevance of its claims, both for functionality and regularity of service (where the interest is used for functions or public services) and for the purposes of the salary that each task.
Failure to stamp the card, at intermediate removals of the employee, thus preventing, in turn, control of the person liable to pay the amount for their service, especially in view of a recovery period of absence, especially in view of a correlative deduction from monthly salary.
On the question of a minority jurisprudential fa leva, in sostanza, sulla considerazione che la timbratura del cartellino rileva “in via diretta ed immediata ai fini della retribuzione e comunque del regolare svolgimento della prestazione di lavoro e solo indirettamente e mediamente, ai fini del regolare svolgimento del servizio” (Cass. Pen., Sez. V, 9 ottobre 2002, n. 38770).
Tale orientamento è stato quello accreditato da parte della Cassazione a Sezioni Unite.
Infatti, dal momento che la condotta di falsificazione ideologica del dipendente pubblico ufficiale ipotizzata dall’art 479 c.p. deve sostanziarsi in un’attività svolta “nell’esercizio of his duties "journalistic, it is necessary to distinguish, within the activities carried out by a civil servant, " acts which are an expression of his public office and / or the public service and who tend to achieve the objectives of the public " those "closely related to the provision " work, and then having exclusive emphasis on the contract plan and not on the functional.
The false representation of reality that is publicly documented by the Act in this case of false documents, it must be substantial in relation to the specific activity the public official, which means that it must invest a fact that, in view of the actual exercise of public functions or award, has the potential to produce legal effects.
From here, you must consider that the timekeeping cards are intended only to certify a material fact which refers to the employment relationship between public servants and public administration, and what the effects are exhausted, no events involving declarative statements or will be referred to the government. The civil servant does not act then either directly or indirectly on behalf of the PA, but operates as mere private person. From this it must be stressed that the timekeeping cards for civil servants should not be considered as "public documents", being designed to certify by the public employee only a material fact which refers to the employment relationship between him and the PA
In this light the United Sections of the Supreme Court Judgement No 41471 of September 30 to October 28, 2009, in resolving the conflict which occurred on this point, have ruled that does not include the crime of false ideology of a public employee of the public the false statement about his presence in the office indicated on labels timestamping because the nature of these documents can not be considered public, but of mere certification of the employee relating to employment, which are governed by private law, documents that do not contain more declarative or events will be referred to the Public Administration.
not fall from the case to the crime of false ideology does not follow that such conduct is of a fraudulent: in consideration of the function statements and "self" that the signing of the paper assumes the presence of effects over time of and completion of concrete work in their areas of responsibility, any conduct that is manipulative the findings of these claims is in itself likely to mislead the public authorities about his presence in the workplace.
As for the existence of injury - the Court said that the function of tags timepiece is to be proof of continuous presence in the workplace of the employee between the hours of public input and time output - must be considered otherwise constitutes conduct which would incorporate the crime of aggravated fraud that of the employee who is temporarily away from work without result, by stamping the card periods of absence, provided that these are to be considered economically significant.
In this regard, the protracted period of unjustified absence from the workplace has created a de facto suspension of the employment relationship that has thus created a financial loss for the institution called upon to pay a fraction of the daily shift that is in fact not been made and the further harm related to non-presence of the employee at work that has implications with respect to functionality and regular service.
0 comments:
Post a Comment