In Italy. Journalist not under investigation wiretapped. ECHR inquiries

Questo articolo è disponibile anche in:

Nancy Porsia denounced to the European Court a violation of her rights to freedom of expression protected by the Convention

OSSIGENO, June 6^th  2025 – On May 22nd 2025, Professor Marina Castellaneta’s newsletter (read here) announced that on April 29^th  Italian journalist Nancy Porsia filed an appeal with the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) for violation of her freedom of expression and her right to receive information, in relation to the incident in which, without being formally under investigation, she was wire-tapped  as part of an investigation into illegal immigration involving members of a non-governmental organization engaged in rescues at. The Court has asked the Italian government for explanations regarding the appeal.

Read here the Ossigeno article on the matter

The story published on Marina Castellaneta’s newsletter

Regarding the wiretapping of journalists and lawyers, the Italian government is required to submit its observations to the European Court of Human Rights, which on April 29^th  communicated to Italy the appeal filed by journalist Nancy Porsia and lawyers Serena Romano and Alessandra Ballerini (ROMANO v. ITALY). The facts underlying appeal no. 37955/21 centre on the wiretapping of a journalist who is not under formal investigation, as part of a government investigation into illegal immigration involving members of a non-governmental organization engaged in rescues at sea. The journalist, who was in contact with some members of the NGO as a professional reporter, was wire-tapped even when talking to two lawyers. Therefore, once she realised that she had been wire-tapped she filed an appeal with the European Court of Human Rights, alleging a violation of Article 10 of the Convention, which guarantees freedom of expression, as well as, with regard to the two lawyers, Articles 8 (right to respect for private life) and 13 (right to effective judicial protection).

In this initial phase, the Court has asked Italy to clarify whether, in the case of the journalist’s appeal, the interference with press freedom resulting from the wire-taps that undermined the confidentiality of sources was legally sanctioned and necessary in a democratic society, considering that the right to receive information had been compromised. Furthermore, with regard to the three applicants, Italy must answer for the possible violation of Article 8, also taking into account the fact that the applicants were neither under formal investigation nor parties to criminal proceedings and, therefore, had no means of challenging the legality and necessity of the measure taken against them (Article 13). ASP