In Pursuit for Greater Accountability for Torture:The Case of Giulio Regeni After Judgment No. 192/2023 of the Italian Constitutional Court

This article examines the Italian Constitutional Court’s Judgment No. 192/2023 on a question of constitutional legitimacy raised in the course of the criminal trial against four Egyptian nationals for the murder and torture of Italian doctoral researcher Giulio Regeni in Egypt in 2016. By declaring the partial unconstitutionality of the Italian legislation on in absentia proceedings, the Court’s decision allowed the trial to proceed even in the defendants’ absence. The judgment is assessed against a backdrop of institutional inertia in securing justice for Regeni. The article first analyses the significance of the Court’s decision, highlighting its implications for international human rights law and, in particular, the duty to exercise criminal jurisdiction over acts of torture under the UN Convention Against Torture. It then critiques the emphasis placed on criminal accountability, as illustrated by Regeni’s case. It argues that such emphasis, combined with the inadequacy of other State responses, risks diluting the right to truth and accountability in its broader sense.