Abstract This article outlines the Italian experience with the offence of abuse of office as a lens through which to analyse broader questions of accountability and discretion in public governance informed by the rule of law. While rooted in domestic legal history, the long-standing controversies surrounding this offence illuminate the political and legal sensitivities that have recently emerged in response to the proposed European directive on corruption, particularly the resistance voiced by several founding Member States. Beyond this contingent trigger, the contribution advances a more general claim: criminal misconduct in office lies at the core of the problem of holding public officials – both national and European – accountable in accordance with rule of law standards. The article argues that abuse of office occupies a distinctive position at the intersection of political discretion, administrative decision-making, and judicial review. Alongside acknowledging that the formulation of such an offence faces concerns relating to legality, fair trial guarantees, and the subsidiary role of criminal law, the article underlines that behaviour amounting to abuse carries a specific and serious wrongfulness that may justify criminalisation. Finally, drawing upon authoritative legal scholarship and interdisciplinary insights, the article offers an unorthodox account of abuse of office, suggesting that – even more than bribery – it undermines not only the legality but the very legitimacy of public power, thereby occupying a prominent position within the broader constellation of corruption-related crimes.
Alberto Di Martino (Mon,) studied this question.