Serious evidence of a crime is required. And the wiretaps must be “absolutely necessary” for the investigation to continue. Therefore, adverbs and adjectives fit together to form a very high assurance barrier. But reading the data provided by Justice Minister Carlo Nordio gives the impression that the bug was placed easily. The prosecutor asks and the investigating judge usually gives the OK, interpreting article 267 of the Criminal Procedure Code very flexibly. The figures asked by Forza Italia MP Enrico Costa (pictured) are impressive.
In 2024, investigative judges accepted 94 percent of requests from prosecutors across Italy. In short, despite strict rules, yeses come a lot. And the word no is an exception. “Catching,” as it is called in the jargon, is an invasive tool that brings things to the surface and must be used in a thoughtful and sensible way. But between one emergency and another, from the mafia to corruption and terrorism, the country has become accustomed to the massive use of “environmental” recordings and telephone calls.
In theory, the “complaint” could continue for 15 days, then you could request an extension for another period of the same duration, but again the law locks it in with adverbs and adjectives. In short, we cannot continue indefinitely but only for a limited time and on condition that listening is “absolutely necessary”.
We are at the same point as before: the investigating judge has given the green light in 2024 to 99 percent of extension applications. Nos is a rare commodity, even very rare. Once again something went wrong.
Additionally, by 2024 judges validated 95 percent of wiretaps, telephone or environmental, ordered immediately by prosecutors. In short, they feel that the speed is reasonable.
But of course all these figures make us think: too often the investigating judge photocopies the prosecutor’s proposals. This is not a judgment, but a statistical element. Impressive in its own way. “Perhaps – Costa ironically – the investigating judge was a useless judge. Otherwise, the absolute adherence to the prosecutor’s thesis would be inexplicable.”
In essence, weapons are only used in very complicated cases, handled every day and become routine.
Moreover, the dominant mentality is that interception is irreplaceable in the fight against rampant crime and any restrictions are seen as an attempt to protect those in power. That’s not the case, but we have become accustomed to observing the ruling class and ordinary people from the wiretap hole – see Garlasco’s investigation of Andrea Sempio – with the effect that it is worth pondering: first, all draft laws are similar and everyone is guilty, then nuances and details often emerge that make a difference and sometimes what seems one way turns out to be very different.
In short, in this moment of review, reflection must also begin on this chapter that costs the public machine around 270 million euros per year.
While there is no denying the value and importance of this tool in a prosecutor’s arsenal, its extensive use is another.
We’ll see, if the yes vote wins in the career separation referendum, whether and how the percentages will change.
