Freedom of the press and Consip investigation, for the Cassation Court the seizures of journalist Marco Lillo are illegitimate

The search and seizure of journalist Marco Lillo's property are unlawful. The Supreme Court of Cassation upholds the appeal of the journalist from Il Fatto Quotidiano, who on July 5, as part of an investigation into leaks related to the Consip investigation, had computer and documentary material seized—at his home and in his editorial office. The Supreme Court emphasized this in ruling 9989, filed today, in which the Supreme Court ordered the return to Lillo of all seized material, further prohibiting the Neapolitan magistrates from "retaining copies of the acquired data." In the Supreme Court's view, with reference to the principles of press freedom established by the Court of Human Rights, the search and seizure were two disproportionate measures adopted against a media professional without any evidentiary connection between the seized documents and the subject of the investigation. Consequently, the Supreme Court ordered the return to Lillo of "all computers, hard drives, pen drives, cell phones, CD-ROMs, and DVD-ROMs seized or acquired in copy," and the same order was issued for the paper documents, including the contract signed by Lillo for the publication of the book "From Father to Son: the Unpublished Papers of the Consip Case and Renzi's Familism." For the seizure to be valid, the Supreme Court explained, annulling without remand the order issued against Lillo, other people close to him, as well as against another journalist from Il Fatto, whose PCs and cell phones were seized, "it is not sufficient to state that these documents relate to the book that disclosed to the public the secret information presumably revealed by a public official or a person in charge of a public service." "It is necessary to verify," continues the ruling written by Councillor Antonio Corbo of the Sixth Criminal Section, "that the documents in question have a specific connection to the conduct of disclosing official secrets, in particular because they contain elements useful for identifying the source of the news received by the journalist." Essentially, to avoid the risk of "potential limitations on press freedom that could arise from unjustifiably invasive initiatives," journalists, more than any other professional category, cannot be subjected to blanket seizures of correspondence, communications, or any other material or documentation based on a "mere pertinence between the news and the general subject of the investigation."