• via Alberto da Giussano, 26, 20145 Milano
  • +39 02 4003 1253
  • info@studiolegalebianucci.it
  • Criminal Lawyer, Family Lawyer, Divorce Lawyer

Wiretaps and Inadmissibility of Evidence: Commentary on Judgment No. 35679 of 2023

Judgment No. 35679 of May 11, 2023, by the Court of Cassation provides important clarifications regarding wiretaps and the inadmissibility of evidence. In this article, we will analyze the main legal aspects of this decision, highlighting the implications for Italian criminal law.

The Case and the Court's Decision

In the case at hand, the Court of Freedom in Naples raised questions regarding the execution of wiretaps that occurred a considerable time after the authorization decree by the investigating judge. The Court of Cassation, accepting the appeal, established that such wiretaps should not be considered inadmissible. This is because there is no violation of the provisions concerning prohibited evidence, as established by Articles 267 and 268 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

The Principle of the Judgment

Wiretaps carried out a considerable time after the authorization decree - Inadmissibility of evidence - Exclusion - Reasons. In terms of wiretaps, the execution of operations a considerable time after the authorization decree by the investigating judge does not determine their inadmissibility, as it does not pertain to prohibited evidence, and Articles 267 and 268 of the Code of Criminal Procedure do not provide for a starting term for the operations from the authorization.

This principle highlights a crucial aspect: the timing of the execution of wiretaps does not affect their validity as evidence. This principle is based on the interpretation of the rules, which do not establish a rigid deadline for the commencement of wiretap operations.

Legal Implications of the Judgment

The decision of the Court of Cassation has several significant implications:

  • Strengthening the validity of evidence obtained through wiretaps, even if executed over a long period following the authorization.
  • Possibility for law enforcement to use information gathered even after a significant interval, thus avoiding the inadmissibility of evidence.
  • Clarification of procedural rules, reducing legal uncertainty for legal practitioners.

In a constantly evolving legal context, this judgment represents a fundamental reference for future investigations and criminal proceedings.

Conclusions

Judgment No. 35679 of 2023 by the Court of Cassation marks an important step in the regulation of wiretaps. The decision clarifies that the temporal distance from the authorization decree does not automatically determine the inadmissibility of evidence, an aspect that could significantly influence the course of many criminal investigations. Legal practitioners will need to pay particular attention to this development, which enriches Italian case law in the field of criminal law.