Public order offences: resisting and insulting an officer
Written and reviewed by Avv. Massimo Romano, admitted to the Italian Court of Cassation — Bar of Naples no. 14553. Last legal review: 6 November 2026.
Public order offences in Italy begin, after most police encounters, with resisting a public official, a charge that requires an active use of violence or threat directed at the officer. A recent reform increased the penalty where the resistance targets a police officer, while insulting an officer is a separate offence whose conditions all have to be met.
What changes the outcome is knowing where the lines fall. Passive resistance is not the offence at all, because no energy is directed at the officer. Refusing to give your identity is a distinct and far slighter matter with its own provision. And where the official act was arbitrary, the code excludes punishment for reacting to it, which is the strongest defence available here and the one most often overlooked.
International criminal lawyer Massimo Romano — Bar of Naples no. 14553, patrocinante in Cassazione dal 23/10/2015 — Roma, Via Avicenna 97, 00146 · Milano, Via Giuseppe Pecchio 3, 20129 · Napoli, Corso Umberto I 237, 80138 — +39 335 669 3954 — Abroad we work through our network of corresponding lawyers in France, Spain, Germany, Belgium, the Netherlands, Austria, Greece and Portugal. Outside the European Union: the United States (Miami, New York, Los Angeles), the United Kingdom (London), the United Arab Emirates (Dubai, Abu Dhabi), Albania (Tirana), Thailand, Turkey (Istanbul), North Africa and South America.
In brief
- Resistance requires violence or threat aimed at the officer, and pushing, grabbing, dragging or physically resisting being placed in a vehicle have all been treated as violence.
- Passive conduct falls outside the offence, because going limp, refusing to walk, holding on to a post or failing to open a door directs no energy at the officer.
- The line between the two is thin, and these cases are decided on the words used in the officer's report, which is why that document is where the defence starts.
- Insulting an official is made out only where the conduct occurred in a public place or a place open to the public, in the presence of several people, and while the official was performing a duty.
- The requirement about presence is the one that fails most often, because people other than the officer and their colleagues must have been physically there, and the abstract possibility that someone might have heard is not enough.
- The provision contains a way out: where the harm is fully repaired before the trial opens, reaching both the officer and the administration, the offence is extinguished.
- Where the official act was arbitrary, the code excludes punishment for resisting, insulting and related conduct, and that defence is regularly left unargued.
- These charges arrive in groups because a single encounter generates several at once, and separating what is actually made out from what has been added is the work that comes before anything else.
What counts as resistance
The offence requires an active use of violence or threat directed at the officer. Struggling forcefully while being restrained, pushing, grabbing an officer and dragging them, physically resisting being placed in a vehicle: all of these have been treated as violence.
What is not covered is passive resistance — going limp, refusing to walk, holding on to a post without striking anyone, failing to open a door. There is no energy directed at the officer. The line between the two is thin and it is where nearly every one of these cases is decided, because it depends entirely on the words used in the officer's report.
| Element | Rule | Provision |
|---|---|---|
| Basic offence | Six months to five years | Art. 337 Criminal Code |
| Against a police officer | Penalty increased by up to a half | Added in 2025 |
| Weapons, disguise, several people acting together | Further increase | Art. 339 |
| Insulting a public official | Six months to three years | Art. 341-bis |
| Refusing to give your identity | Up to one month or a fine up to 206 euro | Art. 651 |
| Reaction to an arbitrary act | No punishment | Art. 393-bis |
Insulting an officer: three conditions, all required
It is not simply swearing at someone in uniform. Article 341-bis requires that the offence be committed in a public place or a place open to the public, in the presence of several people, and while the official is performing a duty.
The second condition is the one that fails most often. At least two people other than the officer and their colleagues must have been physically present. The abstract possibility that someone might have heard is not enough, and that single check closes a great many of these cases.
There is also a way out written into the provision: if the harm is fully repaired before the trial opens — compensating both the officer and their administration — the offence is extinguished. It has to reach both, and it has to be before the trial.
When the officer was in the wrong
This is the strongest defence available and it is regularly overlooked. Article 393-bis excludes punishment for resisting, insulting and related offences where the official caused the situation by exceeding the limits of their powers with arbitrary acts.
Complaining that officers were rude does not meet it. It requires an act outside their powers — a personal search conducted where the law did not allow it, force plainly disproportionate to the situation. Where it applies, the entire group of charges arising from that encounter falls, including the insult.
The evidence disappears fast: CCTV, recordings made by bystanders, hospital records for injuries you sustained, the identification record. All of it has to be secured in the first days.
The 2025 constitutional ruling
The 2022 reform had excluded the defence of particular tenuity for resisting and related offences committed against police officers. In 2025 the Constitutional Court struck that exclusion down as it applied to resisting a public official, so the defence is available again for that offence.
It was not struck down for the offence of insulting an officer, which remains excluded. The distinction is technical and it matters: two charges arising from the same incident are now treated differently.
A police encounter typically produces several charges together, and each has a weak point of its own. The table sets out what each requires and where it usually fails.
| Charge | What it requires | Where it usually fails |
|---|---|---|
| Resisting a public official | Violence or threat directed at the officer to oppose an official act | Where the conduct described is passive rather than violent |
| Violence or threat to obtain or prevent an official act | Conduct aimed at securing or stopping the act | Where no act was being performed or demanded at the time |
| Insulting a public official | A public place, several people present, and an official on duty | Where nobody beyond the officers was actually present |
| Refusing to give your identity | A refusal to supply identity to an officer entitled to ask for it | Where identity was in fact supplied, or no lawful request was made |
| Injury to officers | Injury established and attributed to the person | Where neither the injury nor its cause is individually attributed |
| Carrying an object capable of causing injury | Carrying it without a reason that justifies it | Where an activity actually under way explains the object |
Why these charges arrive in groups
Resisting, insulting and refusing to identify frequently appear together in a single set of proceedings, sometimes with an offence of assault as well. They do not absorb one another: insulting is not an element of resisting, so both stand.
The practical consequence is that a defence cannot concentrate on the most serious charge alone. Removing the minor ones affects the overall sentence more than the brackets suggest, and it is often easier.
Frequently asked questions
Is running away from the police an offence in Italy?
Flight alone is not resistance: there is no violence or threat directed at the officer. It becomes resistance if pushing, blows or dangerous manoeuvres against those pursuing are added.
What if the police acted improperly?
Article 393-bis excludes punishment where the official exceeded the limits of their powers with arbitrary acts. It requires an act outside their powers, not merely an unpleasant manner.
Can I be charged for insulting an officer?
Only if it happened in a public place, in the presence of at least two other people, and while the official was performing a duty. All three conditions are required.
Do resisting and insulting charges merge?
No. They are separate offences and both stand, because the insult is not an element of the offence of resisting.
If you were arrested after a police encounter
If there was an arrest, the validation hearing comes within hours and the account of the incident is fixed there. First contact is free and covered by professional privilege, at any hour.
The decisions to make in the next hours
After an encounter with the police, the person faces a handful of choices, and most of them get made by default because nobody names them.
Whether to apologise or to explain on the spot. A calm explanation at the time can ease tension and may later appear in the officers' own notes. The price is that anything said is recorded in writing by the officers, and an apology can be read as an admission that the words or the movements were as described. Saying nothing beyond identity is lawful and often wiser.
Whether to dispute the officers' account or to accept it. The charge rests on a written note by the officers, and that note is often the only account of what happened. Disputing it requires something to set against it: a video, a witness, a medical record. Without that, a bare denial has little weight. Accepting the account may allow a quicker route out of the case, but it gives up arguments that could change the legal description of what happened.
Whether to try to repair the harm. For the insulting offence, a repair made before the trial can extinguish the charge, which makes the choice attractive. The price is that the repair must be to the person and also to the administration, in a way the court accepts, and an informal payment can be read as pressure. The lawyer should arrange it.
None of these decisions is final in the opening hours, but each leaves a trace in the file, and the trace is what the court reads.
Whether conduct counts as violence against an officer is the question on which these files turn. The table takes the conduct people describe and shows what the defence examines in each case.
| Conduct | How it is characterised | What the defence examines |
|---|---|---|
| Striking, pushing or grabbing the officer | Violence within the offence | Whether the contact is established and attributed to this person |
| Pulling away forcefully while held | Capable of amounting to violence | Whether the movement was directed at the officer or at escaping a grip |
| Going limp and refusing to walk | Outside the offence | The exact wording the report uses to describe it |
| Holding on to a post or a railing | Outside the offence | Whether any force reached the officer at all |
| Shouting at the officer | Not resistance, and insult only under its own conditions | Who was present, where, and whether a duty was being performed |
| Reacting to an act that was arbitrary | Punishment excluded by the code | Whether the official act exceeded what the officer was entitled to do |
Who comes to this page
Some readers have just left a police station. They were at a demonstration, a bar closing, a football match, a roadside check or an argument at a station, words were exchanged, someone was pushed, and they were arrested or reported. They are confused because they did not strike anyone, or because what they said was in a moment of anger, and now they are told they have been charged with resisting or insulting an officer.
Others are foreigners who did not understand what the officers were asking. A tourist who was asked for documents in Italian and did not respond, a visitor who resisted being taken by the arm because they thought they were being robbed, a worker who raised their voice at a checkpoint. They are now told that they have refused to give their identity or have resisted an official, and they have no way of knowing whether a language gap explains the situation.
A relative is another usual reader. A parent or a partner receives a call from a person in a cell who says that the arrest was a misunderstanding. They want to know whether the person will be released, whether a record will follow them, and whether the matter affects a work permit, a student visa or a job application. The charge sounds small to them, and it is not always small in its effects.
What a conviction or even a charge does to daily life
Public order charges are treated as minor by those who have never faced them, and the daily life consequences can be heavy. An arrest in the street may end with a night in a cell and a morning at a hearing, and a person who has not slept, who does not speak Italian and who has no lawyer is poorly placed to explain anything. A foreign worker may lose the shift, the week or the job.
The charge itself can affect immigration status. A residence permit renewal may be delayed while a case is open, a student visa can be questioned, and an application for citizenship can be put on hold. Employers in security, transport, education or the public sector check records and ask about pending charges, and any conviction may be a reason to refuse a position. For people who travel for work, a record can complicate entry into some countries.
The wider social effect is on family and reputation. A person who was arrested at a demonstration may be named in local press, and relatives may face questions. Teenagers and students arrested in groups find that schools and universities ask for explanations. Police encounters often leave fear of the next encounter, and a person who has been charged may avoid public places or events. Practical things matter too: replacing a phone seized at the scene, paying a fine that has to be settled before the case moves, and arranging time off for hearings that can be set at short notice.
What not to do after an encounter with the police
- Do not argue with the officers while being taken in. Words spoken at that moment are recorded, and a further offence can be added by a remark made in anger.
- Do not refuse to give your identity. It is a separate and easily proved offence, and refusal is the commonest way to turn a minor stop into a charge.
- Do not discuss the facts at the police station without a lawyer. You are not obliged to, and what you say can be used.
- Do not sign a note you cannot read. Ask for the interpreter, which is a right, and for a copy.
- Do not post video or accounts online before showing them to the lawyer. Material meant to defend you can show conduct that supports the charge.
- Do not contact the officers or the witnesses after the event. It can be read as pressure.
- Do not delete footage or messages. Evidence you consider unhelpful may show that the officers acted unlawfully.
- Do not go back to the place of the incident to look for witnesses yourself. Ask the lawyer to approach them in a way that can be used later.
- Do not make a complaint against the officers on impulse. A complaint may be justified, but it should be prepared with the lawyer and the medical evidence, because a weak complaint is used against you.
- Do not accept a ride or a favour from the officers as a way of smoothing things over. It creates an impression of a deal and does not settle anything.
What to collect while the memory is fresh
- A written account of the event in your own words, made immediately, with times, places and the sequence of what each person did. Give it to the lawyer only, as it is a private working note.
- Any video, photograph or audio, from your phone, from friends and from public cameras. Note where the cameras were and ask the lawyer how to request the footage before it is overwritten.
- The names and contacts of bystanders who saw what happened and who are willing to speak. Do not coach them.
- Medical records of any injury, from the hospital or the doctor, with dates. Injuries to you may bear on the account of force.
- The papers handed to you at the police station, including the notice of arrest or the record of the stop, and the identity of the officers if known.
- Proof of your status and ties: passport, residence permit, work contract, student card. They matter for the measures a judge may impose.
- A note of your earlier contacts with the police, if any, told honestly to the lawyer.
- Proof of any repair or apology made through the lawyer, so that it can be shown to the court.
- The names of anyone who can speak to your character and circumstances, such as an employer or a teacher, in writing and without exaggeration.
- A photograph of the place taken in daylight: lighting, distances and the position of people can matter for what could be seen and heard.
What can be argued later depends on what was collected while the encounter was still fresh. The table lists the items, their source and their use.
| Item | Who holds it | What it is used for |
|---|---|---|
| A written account of the encounter made the same day | The person | It fixes detail that fades long before the file arrives |
| Names and contact details of everyone present | The person and those who were there | The presence of others decides the insult charge |
| Photographs of any injury or marks, dated | The person | They test how force was used on each side |
| The clothing worn, kept unwashed | The person | It can corroborate or contradict the struggle as described |
| Records of medical attendance | The hospital or the attending doctor | An independent and contemporaneous description of injuries |
| Footage from phones, shops or public transport | Those present and the operators concerned | Recordings are overwritten within days unless requested |
| The documents served at the station | The authority that served them | They name the office, the charge and the periods already running |
When the stop happened to a person from another country
A police encounter is harder when the person does not speak the language. Words that were meant as a complaint can be heard as a threat, and gestures that are normal at home can be read as aggression. An interpreter is a right in the proceedings, but it is often provided late or by telephone, so a statement made before the interpreter arrived may need to be challenged. Say clearly at the beginning that you do not understand, and ask for the interpreter to be recorded in the notes.
Documents are the other difficulty. A foreign passport is usually enough for identification, but a person who left it at the hotel can be taken to the police station for the purpose, and that is where encounters often go wrong. Keeping a photograph of the passport on the phone and a copy in the bag reduces that risk. If identification is delayed, the consulate may be able to confirm who you are.
Distance affects the follow-up. A tourist who goes home before the hearing still has to deal with it, and a notice sent to a hotel address may never reach them. Give the lawyer a reliable address and email, and agree who will receive notices. Hearings may be set when you are abroad; a lawyer can sometimes appear for you, but only with a signed and certified authority. If you intend to return, say so. The consulate can help with documents and give general information, but it cannot advise on the case. Time zones affect calls, so arrange a fixed slot.
How the studio approaches a public order charge
We start by reading what the officers wrote, because the case begins there. You send the papers by email as photographs or scans, and we tell you which offence is charged, which conditions the prosecution must show and which of them look weak on the paper. The engagement is confirmed in writing, with an estimate of cost in phases.
The opening call is used to hear your account without interruption, to ask what evidence exists on your side and to explain what will happen next. We discuss whether to propose a repair of the harm or an alternative route, and what each would leave on your record. The studio works in English and Italian. If you prefer another language, we say so early and arrange an interpreter for the main conversations.
Offices in Rome, Milan and Naples let a lawyer attend the hearing in the city where the incident happened. If you have returned abroad, we ask the court to allow representation by a lawyer with a power of attorney, and we coordinate with a lawyer in your country about what the charge means for your record there. We remain reachable outside office hours when someone has just been arrested. We make no promise about the result; that depends on the evidence and the judge. The email address is avvmassimoromano@gmail.com.
Questions to ask the lawyer about resisting or insulting an officer
- Which offence is charged, and what exactly do the officers say I did?
- Is what is described active violence or threat, or passive resistance that falls outside the offence?
- If I am charged with insulting an officer, were all the conditions met: the place, the presence of several people and the performance of a duty?
- Who were the people said to be present, and can they be identified and heard?
- Is there video, and has anyone asked for it?
- Was the officer acting lawfully, and does that change how my conduct is assessed?
- Can the harm be repaired, to whom, and how do I show it to the court?
- Is the act perhaps of such minor weight that the court can decline to punish?
- What will the outcome do to my record, my permit and my travel?
- Does the charge depend on a complaint, and has the person concerned made it or withdrawn it?
- Were the officers dressed and identifiable, and what does the record say about their instructions at the time?
Look for answers that deal with these elements item by item. A general assurance that such charges are common is not an answer. Ask the lawyer to say which element of the offence is weakest on the papers and what is needed to show it.
Italian words that appear on a police report
- Resistenza a pubblico ufficiale: resisting a public official. It requires active violence or threat, not passive resistance.
- Oltraggio: insulting an officer, an offence with conditions: a public place, several people present and an officer performing a duty.
- Violenza o minaccia: violence or threat, the conduct needed for resistance to count as an offence.
- Annotazione di servizio: the service note written by the officers, the document from which the case usually starts.
- Arresto in flagranza: arrest at the moment of the act or immediately after, which is followed by a hearing to check its lawfulness.
- Rifiuto di indicazioni sulla propria identità: refusal to give your identity, a minor offence separate from the others.
- Particolare tenuità del fatto: a finding that the act is of particularly minor weight, so that no punishment follows.
- Riparazione del danno: repair of the harm, which for the insulting offence can extinguish the charge.
- Persona offesa: the injured party, here the officer or the administration.
- Convalida dell'arresto: the validation of the arrest, the hearing at which a judge checks that the arrest was lawful and decides on any restrictions.
- Querela: a complaint made by the injured party, which in some offences is needed for the case to continue and can be withdrawn.
- Estinzione del reato: the extinction of the offence, the effect of a repair accepted by the court.
About the lawyer
Criminal defence is the whole of this practice. Avv. Massimo Romano is enrolled with the Ordine degli Avvocati di Napoli and pleads before the Court of Cassation; the work that reaches him concerns Italian criminal procedure, extradition, European arrest warrants, and cases where an Italian citizen is held by a foreign authority. He takes instructions directly. The first contact is short and factual: what the charge is said to be, where the person is, what has already been signed or handed over. Nothing is promised at that stage, because the file has usually not been read. What follows the call is practical, a list of documents to collect, contact with the authority or with local counsel abroad, and a plan for the next hearing or request. Where relatives do not speak Italian, the conversation continues in their own language, and written updates are sent in that language as well, so nobody relies on second-hand translation.
Ring the office directly, or write on WhatsApp if calling is difficult. Keep beside you the summons or the record of the search, and the name of any lawyer already acting.
Avv. Massimo Romano — criminal defence lawyer, admitted to the Italian Court of Cassation
Iscritto all'Ordine degli Avvocati di Napoli n. 14553 | Patrocinante in Cassazione dal 23/10/2015
Roma, Via Avicenna 97, 00146 · Milano, Via Giuseppe Pecchio 3, 20129 · Napoli, Corso Umberto I 237, 80138
+39 335 669 3954 · WhatsApp