Wiretapping, prosecutors' requests accepted by the judge in 94% of cases

Gip flattened on the prosecutors' requests. Too much, according to Enrico Costa (Forza Italia) who, in order to get a complete picture of the preliminary investigation judges' answers to the prosecution's questions, questioned the Ministry of Justice. And the answer was, in its own way, eloquent. Because numbers in hand, what emerged was a picture of almost total adherence, from interceptions to preliminary investigations, passing through archiving.

More specifically, with reference to 2024, as regards requests for authorisation to order interceptions, the percentage of acceptance is 94%, while the request for extension (today the subject of a reform that for the first time introduced a maximum term for the duration of listening operations) is granted by the gip in 99% of cases and 100% when the listening activity is requested in investigations against organised crime.

As for the total number of wiretaps, the reference is to the ministry's judicial statistics that, as of 2024, attribute almost 48,000 targets being listened in on, including telephone interceptions (the most frequently used, about 34,000), environmental, computer and trojan wire interceptions. The percentage was only slightly lower for the request for extension of preliminary investigations, which received 85% assent.

Again for 2024, the number of filing requests of proceedings entered in register 21, against identified persons therefore, was 444,430, while the number of decrees of dismissal given by the Gip were 385,633, equal to 87% of the requests. In the previous years, the percentage reached 109% in 2022 and 102% in 2023, where the number of decrees of dismissal exceeding the requests is explained by a submission by the prosecutor not always in the same calendar year in which the proceedings are defined by the gip.

Commenting on the data, Costa emphasised that 'the prerequisites for the authorisation of wiretapping by the gip are very specific. The existence of grave indicia of crime must be established and the wiretapping must be absolutely essential for the continuation of the investigation. This means that there must be a check that the crime report is not smoky, serious indications of an offence, and that the investigation cannot continue without wiretapping, which the law only allows in the case of absolute indispensability. The gip's scrutiny is anything but bureaucratic and must focus on these elements'.