The crossroads between unity and plurality: challenges of absorption in economic criminal law

Abstract

This article addresses the application of the principle of absorption (consunção) within the scope of Economic Criminal Law, a field marked by the plurality of incriminations and the difficulty of fitting into traditional dogmatic categories. The central problem investigated lies in the tendency of forensic practice to dismiss absorption and apply, almost automatically, the concurrence of crimes, opting for the most severe solution and revealing the lack of solid criteria for resolving normative conflicts in this area. The hypothesis guiding the study maintains that the peculiar dynamics and the specific logic of Economic Criminal Law, characterized by mobility, flexibility, and the protection of supra-individual and abstract legal interests, hinder the application of classic criteria for resolving conflicts of norms, demanding the formulation of new parameters or the critical re-adaptation of existing ones. The main objective consists of examining the contours of the application of absorption in Economic Criminal Law, highlighting how doctrine and jurisprudence have faced the concurrence of norms and pointing out the coherence, or the absence thereof, in the criteria employed. The methodology adopted is bibliographic and documentary research, with a critical analysis of doctrine and jurisprudence, through the observation of cases in which the principle of absorption is raised.