It is not me, or it was years ago: identity and old cases
Two situations that feel hopeless have specific remedies. Where enforcement is directed at a person other than the one named in the judgment, the judge responsible for enforcement can correct it. Where a conviction was obtained against someone who gave your identity, the route is different and slower, but it exists.
Enforcement against the wrong person
The code provides expressly for error of identity at the enforcement stage. Where it appears that the sentence is being enforced against someone other than the person to whom the judgment refers, the enforcement judge orders that it cease. It is a swift procedure and it does not require reopening the trial.
It applies to the classic situation: the same or similar name, the same date of birth, a document copied from a database, an alert circulating against the wrong record. What proves it is documentary — passports, entry and exit records, employment records, fingerprints where they exist in the file.
Where someone used your identity
Harder, because the judgment was pronounced against a person who was physically there and gave your name. Two things then have to be established: that the person tried was not you, and that the identification recorded in the file is wrong.
- Obtain the file, and in particular any fingerprints or photographs taken at identification.
- Prove where you were at the relevant dates: travel, work, medical, banking records.
- Identify the source of the identity: a lost or stolen document, a copy given to someone, a data breach.
- File a complaint for the substitution of your identity, which is itself an offence.
- Raise it in every proceeding where the identity appears, not only the one you discovered first.
Where a final conviction has to be undone, the remedy is revision, and it requires new evidence capable of showing the person was not the author. It is demanding, and the documentary work above is what makes it possible.
Cases from years ago
Old files surface at borders, in visa applications and in bank screening. Before doing anything, three things have to be established: whether the decision is final, whether the sentence is still enforceable, and whether the limitation period on enforcement has run.
| Question | Why it matters | Where the answer is |
|---|---|---|
| Is the decision final? | Determines which remedy is available | The court record |
| Was it served, and where? | Governs remedies for lack of knowledge | The service record |
| Is the sentence still enforceable? | Enforcement is subject to its own limitation | The enforcement file |
| Is an alert circulating? | It acts independently of the case | Separate procedure |
| Was it me? | Determines whether the identity remedies apply | Identification documents in the file |
The service record is usually the decisive document. It shows whether notice went to an address you actually had, which governs the remedies for a conviction you did not know about, set out in the guide on proceedings you did not know about.
Do not travel to establish it
The instinct is to go to Italy and sort it out. That is the one thing not to do while an alert may be circulating: an alert acts at a border, including in transit, and being detained while the position is clarified is precisely what should be avoided.
All the preliminary work — obtaining the file, the service record and the identification material — is done through a lawyer here and requires no attendance.
Frequently asked questions
A sentence is being enforced against me but it is not mine.
The code provides a specific remedy for error of identity at the enforcement stage: the enforcement judge orders that it cease, without reopening the trial.
Someone used my identity and was convicted.
Two things must be established: that the person tried was not you, and that the identification in the file is wrong. Fingerprints and photographs taken at identification are decisive.
Can an old conviction still be enforced?
It depends on whether the decision is final and whether enforcement is still within its own limitation period. Both have to be checked before anything else.
Should I go to Italy to sort it out?
No, not while an alert may be circulating. Everything preliminary can be done through a lawyer without your attendance.
If something has surfaced
The first step is establishing what exists and against whom, and it can be done from where you are. First contact is free and covered by professional privilege.