EUROPEAN COMMISSION Luxembourg, 13.7.2022 SWD(2022) 512 final COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 2022 Rule of Law Report















Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Italy Accompanying the document Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions 2022 Rule of Law Report

















The rule of law situation in the European Union {COM(2022) 500 final} - {SWD(2022) 501 final} - {SWD(2022) 502 final} - {SWD(2022) 503 final} - {SWD(2022) 504 final} - {SWD(2022) 505 final} - {SWD(2022) 506 final} - {SWD(2022) 507 final} - {SWD(2022) 508 final} - {SWD(2022) 509 final} - {SWD(2022) 510 final} - {SWD(2022) 511 final} - {SWD(2022) 513 final} - {SWD(2022) 514 final} - {SWD(2022) 515 final} - {SWD(2022) 516 final} - {SWD(2022) 517 final} - {SWD(2022) 518 final} - {SWD(2022) 519 final} - {SWD(2022) 520 final} - {SWD(2022) 521 final} - {SWD(2022) 522 final} - {SWD(2022) 523 final} - {SWD(2022) 524 final} - {SWD(2022) 525 final} - {SWD(2022) 526 final} - {SWD(2022) 527 final}



Abstract Comprehensive long-awaited civil and criminal justice reforms have been adopted as part of the commitments of the Italian Recovery and Resilience Plan, aiming at improving the quality and efficiency of the justice system. Digitalisation of the justice system is further progressing at civil courts, while challenges remain at criminal courts and prosecution offices. Specific measures aimed at supporting judges are being implemented. These measures, coupled with forthcoming implementing legislation, intend to address the serious challenges related to the efficiency of the justice system, including backlogs and length of proceedings. On 16 June 2022, the Italian Parliament approved a new law to reform the justice system, which also includes provisions regarding the establishment and functioning of the High Council for the Judiciary. Implementing legislation, to be adopted within one year, will provide the opportunity to adopt more detailed provisions that take into account European standards on judicial independence, including on the organisational powers of the presidents of courts and the involvement of lawyers in the professional evaluation of magistrates. Italy’s new National Anti-Corruption Plan (2022-2024) is planned to be in place in the summer 2022. While the criminal justice reform addresses the excessive delays in corruption prosecutions, close monitoring will be required to ensure that corruption cases will not be automatically closed at appeals level. Challenges still exist for corruption investigators regarding the level of interconnection of the registries that include relevant financial data, which calls for increased digitalisation and artificial intelligence tools. Several legislative proposals aimed at strengthening corruption prevention are still pending, including on whistleblower protection, conflicts of interest and lobbying. Political party and campaign financing rules show some significant loopholes, while several investigations into cases were launched and first instance conviction reached. The practice of channelling donations to political parties through political foundations and associations present a serious obstacle to public accountability, as transactions are difficult to trace and no common, single register exists. Corruption is increasingly used to infiltrate the legal economy. Italy has a robust legislative framework regulating the media sector, including its public service media, as well as an independent and effective media regulator. Concerns persist with regard to the precarious working conditions of many journalists in the country, the protection of journalistic sources and the issue of professional secrecy. While prison sentences for defamation have largely been abolished following a landmark Constitutional Court ruling in 2021, the increasing prevalence of SLAPP cases and the combination of criminal and civil defamation raises concerns. In spite of a well-functioning and resourced coordination centre dedicated to monitoring the issue, cases of physical attacks and intimidation against journalists and media outlets continue to rise year-on-year. The Parliament and the Constitutional Court have continued to exercise scrutiny over restrictive measures taken in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, while the emergency regime has recently ended. Due to delays in the legislative process, a National Human Rights Institution remains to be established. Democratic participation of civil society organisations would be promoted through a permanent advisory board. However, the civic space remains narrow, in particular for the organisations dealing with migrants, and the registration process for non-governmental organisations remains complex.



Recommendations In addition to recalling the commitments made under the national Recovery and Resilience Plan relating to certain aspects of the justice system and the anti-corruption framework, it is recommended to Italy to: ·Continue the efforts to further improve the level of digitalisation of the justice system, particularly for criminal courts and prosecutors’ offices. ·Continue effective operations of police and prosecution service against high-level corruption, including by enhancing digitalisation and interconnection of registries. ·Adopt comprehensive conflict of interests rules and lobbying regulation to establish an operational lobbying register, including a legislative footprint. ·Effectively address the practice of channelling donations through political foundations and associations and introduce single electronic register for party and campaign finance information. ·Introduce legislative and other safeguards to reform the regime on defamation, the protection of professional secrecy and journalistic sources, taking into account the European standards on the protection of journalists. ·Increase efforts to establish a National Human Rights Institution taking into account the UN Paris Principles



I.Justice System The structure of the justice system is set out in the Constitution, which enshrines its independence and autonomy. Ordinary courts have jurisdiction in civil and criminal matters and are organised in three instances. The first instance is composed of justices of the peace, ordinary courts and juvenile courts. The second and third instances are made up of the courts of appeal and the High Court of Cassation, respectively. Administrative justice is organised in first and second instance courts. Jurisdiction in accounting matters is exercised by the Court of Auditors (with Regional and Central Chambers). Regarding fiscal matters, the responsible courts are fiscal courts at first and second instance and the High Court of Cassation at the highest level. The structure of the prosecution service mirrors that of the courts. Italy participates in the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO). According to the principle of unity of the judiciary, ordinary judges and public prosecutors are all magistrates, have a common career structure, and are governed by the High Council for the Judiciary. Administrative, accounting and fiscal magistrates have their own self-government bodies. The National Bar Council is an independent and self-governing body established by law. The Constitutional Court decides in exclusivity on disputes regarding the constitutionality of laws. Independence The level of perceived judicial independence in Italy continues to be low among the general public, while it is average among companies. Overall, 37% of the general population and 40% of companies perceive the level of independence of courts and judges to be ‘fairly or very good’ in 2022 . According to data in the 2022 EU Justice Scoreboard, the perceived judicial independence among the general public has consistently increased since 2016. Both figures have increased in comparison to 2021 (34% for the general public and 29% for companies), as well as in comparison to 2016 (25% for the general public and 24% for companies).

The newly adopted law for the reform of the High Council for the Judiciary (CSM) aims at addressing challenges relating to the representativeness of its members. Since August 2020 a draft law increasing the number of the members of the CSM and modifying the way in which they are elected, to enhance their independence vis-à-vis their professional associations, was pending before Parliament. On 16 June 2022, the Parliament approved the new law, including on the number of CSM members and the way in which they are elected. The current CSM will end its mandate on 24 September 2022. On 23 March 2022, the CSM issued an opinion on the draft law. While supporting the proposed new electoral system, the CSM underlined that some provisions might undermine the independent functioning of the body. Stricter rules on ‘revolving doors’ for the judiciary and other positive provisions are also included in the newly adopted law. The new legislation also addresses the topic of direct participation of magistrates in political life which has been raised as a concern by GRECO. The law introduces stricter provisions, including the ineligibility to elected positions of magistrates who have been on duty with judicial offices located in the constituency in the three years before the election and a cooling-off period of 3 years if not elected. They also include the prohibition to simultaneously exercise judicial functions and elected/governmental ones and the prohibition for magistrates who have held elected positions to come back to the bench at the end of their term of office. Further positive aspects of the law a faster access to the competition to access the judiciary, and new trainings, including on statistical data. On 23 March 2022, the CSM assessed such set of rules largely positively. The CSM and other stakeholders have raised concerns that some provisions of the draft law on the reform of the CSM and the justice system could result in an undue influence on judges. The law, approved by the Parliament on 16 June, provides the reform of the justice system and includes provisions on the establishment and functioning of the High Council for the Judiciary. Its implementing legislation is due within one year. The new legislation regulates the organisational powers of courts presidents. In particular, it introduces a professional evaluation of magistrates, which, among other things, will take into account the achievement of expected results set by presidents of courts and the possibility to initiate disciplinary action for non-compliance with instructions from presidents of courts as to the expected results. Furthermore, it envisages the reduction of the number of middle managerial positions and regulates powers for the First President of the High Court of Cassation. Moreover, the professional evaluation for high-level positions will take into account the outcome of the ruling in subsequent instances, which may be seen as implicitly calling for a uniform ruling on certain topics. While these provisions aim at increasing efficiency, they have been criticised by the CSM and the National Association of Magistrates (ANM) for a tendency towards an increased internal judicial hierarchy and a potential use of disciplinary proceedings as an instrument of governance of judicial offices. The Ministry of Justice noted that the new organisational measures would not impact the decision making autonomy and independence of magistrates. The combined effect of the new provisions may lead to dependencies which may entail undue influence on judge’s independence. However, implementing legislation will provide the opportunity for more detailed provisions on how judicial independence is ensured. According to European standards, the search for enhanced efficiency should not compromise judicial independence. Further provisions of the newly adopted law aim to confer voting powers of lawyers on appraisal of magistrates. The new legislation introduces the power for lawyers to vote at Local Councils for the Judiciary on the appraisal of magistrates. While being members of the local Councils for the Judiciary, the lawyers continue to exercise their profession. The CSM and the ANM have raised the concern that this may constitute a conflict of interest, due to the absence of incompatibility rules. The Ministry of Justice noted that the new law introduces some safeguards aiming to eliminate the risk of conflict of interest of lawyers called to cast a vote on the assessment of the professionalism of the magistrates. Further measures have been adopted to continue to address integrity challenges. The CSM has continued to take additional action as regards serious allegations relating to magistrates disclosed by a criminal investigation which led to the resignation of five members of the CSM . This includes opening additional disciplinary proceedings against magistrates, decisions not to confirm magistrates in high level position functions, and administrative transfers. Secondary legislation has been revised to improve the functioning and the independence of the CSM. Quality Significant recruitments are ongoing for both judicial and administrative staff, while specific measures are envisaged to support the work of judges. Despite the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the recruitment of judicial staff which prevented the competition to take place in 2020, in July 2021, a competition for 310 posts for judges and prosecutors was launched and should be completed by the end of 2022. A new competition for 500 posts for judges and prosecutors is expected to start by June 2022. However, from the time the examination is announced to the time the positions are actually filled, there is a delay of at least four years. Administrative staff, especially law clerks and legal assistants, has substantially increased in 2021 (4 837 posts compared to 1 920 posts in 2020). In the context of the National Recovery and Resilience Plan (RRP), specific measures by temporary hiring of administrative staff are envisaged to support the work of judges. This support team was reorganised as part of the existing Office of the Trial, a structure aimed at ensuring a reasonable length of the trial. On 6 August 2021, a national competition took place to select 8 171 people to be included in the offices of the trial at civil and criminal courts. The selected staff started work in February 2022. These measures also aim at reducing case backlogs and improving efficiency, and include staff training to meet the digital transition challenges in the justice system. They help addressing a long-standing country-specific recommendation issued in the context of the European Semester on the efficiency of the justice system. In addition, on 27 December 2021, a Decree of the Minister of Justice identified the criteria, minimum duration and priority rules, also based on the targets set in Italy’s RRP, to activate an ad hoc flexible task force. It also completed the legal framework for magistrates to be allocated where most needed in each judicial office in a critical situation. For administrative justice, specific recruitments for temporary staff are also envisaged in the context of the RRP; a competition for 168 units started in July 2021 and 162 selected staff signed their contract in early 2022. Digitalisation of the justice system is progressing in civil and administrative courts, while challenges remain in criminal courts and prosecution offices. While already completed at first and second instance of civil courts, the digitalisation of proceedings is still in progress at the civil sections of the Court of Cassation. For Judges of Peace, electronic communication has been extended also for interaction with public administrations, and the management of electronic filing of documents by lawyers is expected to be completed by June 2022. However, at criminal courts, digitalisation of trials is still at the beginning and is expected to be completed only for the first instance by late 2023. At prosecution offices, digitalisation still faces some challenges, but there are efforts to improve. In administrative proceedings, digitalisation is the rule except for the hearings. In particular, rules are in place that allow, in some cases, to use distance communication technology in hearings . Secure electronic communication is now available between all courts, between all courts and lawyers, detention facilities and notaries, and between some courts and bailiffs . Digital solutions to initiate and follow proceedings have been further expanded, especially in civil and commercial proceedings where it is now also possible in some cases to file an application for legal aid online . Training for judicial and administrative staff on enhanced digitalisation of the justice system has started. Furthermore, a cooperation started on 29 September 2021 between the judiciary and the academia in order to develop algorithm-based search engine for legal analysis and artificial intelligence tools applied to case law. The High Court of Cassation, the Council of State and the Court of Auditors, together with the Data Protection Authority, have started to cooperate with the aim to explore common procedures to anonymise personal and sensitive data, notably those included in publicly accessible judicial databases. A comprehensive reform of tax courts of first and second instances is foreseen by the end of 2022. A new technical and operational committee has been tasked to draft a legislative proposal reforming tax justice, including tax courts. The draft aims at introducing a gradual turnover mechanism to replace part-time tax judges with full-time judges. It also aims at introducing a mechanism allowing to end proceedings after a certain period of time, in the absence of an interest of the parties not to close the case. It also creates a facilitated settlement of pending disputes. In order to improve efficiency, on 19 October 2021, the Court of Cassation and the Ministry of Economy and Finance, signed an agreement allowing the judges of the High Court of Cassation to access the information technology system of tax justice of first and second instances. Standards to improve the quality of judicial decisions have been included in the enabling law for the efficiency of civil trials. Law No. 206 of 26 November 2021 has introduced standards for clarity and conciseness for judicial decisions and for judicial acts of lawyers. Stakeholders have pointed out that electronic filing through a structured format would facilitate the registration and the examination of the act and would consequently allow for clear and concise rulings, aiming also at efficiency gains. One additional region has been admitted to the Proximity Offices project to enhance access to justice. Three-fourths of regions have now been allowed to establish proximity offices to facilitate access to justice especially for vulnerable groups. Such offices will inform users about legal protection and access to justice in proceedings where no assistance of a lawyer is needed, facilitate the electronic filing of documents, obtain copies of judicial acts through simplified procedures, and ease contacts with the judiciary for some topics. New provisions regarding criminal justice aim at efficiency gains and need close monitoring to ensure the effectiveness of the justice system is maintained. The reform for the efficiency of criminal justice also includes some provisions applicable for crimes committed after 1 January 2020, setting maximum time limits to conclude trials at the Court of Appeal and the High Court of Cassation, otherwise the case will be barred . Due to efficiency issues especially at appeal level, the new measures risk to negatively impact the criminal trials, especially ongoing ones, as they could be automatically terminated. Although exceptions have been introduced and temporary rules are in place , the effectiveness of the criminal justice system requires close monitoring at national level to ensure a right balance between the introduction of the new provisions and the rights of the defence, the rights of victims and the interest of the public in efficient criminal proceedings . To that aim, a technical-scientific Committee established at the Ministry of Justice will monitor the gradual transition to the new regime . Efficiency The length of proceedings is still a serious challenge. In 2020, disposition times showed an increase at all instances both for civil and commercial litigious cases, and for criminal cases. The temporary slowdown of judicial activity due to severe restrictive measures adopted to address the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 had an impact on both incoming and resolved cases with a strong influence on disposition time . Accordingly, provisional data on disposition time for 2021 show a clear drop back to pre-pandemic values . At the High Court of Cassation, a positive development is observed as incoming cases continue to decrease and resolved cases continue to increase . However, in 2021, more than half of the cases in the field of international protection have been declared inadmissible and tax court cases registered high rates of annulments . Administrative courts kept decreasing disposition time at all instances , with continued positives results in some areas such as public procurement and electoral matters . Italy remains under the enhanced supervision of the Council of Europe’s Committee of Ministers as regards length of proceedings in administrative cases and length of proceedings in criminal cases. A comprehensive long-awaited civil justice reform has been adopted, aiming at addressing efficiency challenges. In the context of the RRP, Italy has committed to reducing by 40% the disposition time at three instances of civil justice by late 2026 . On 26 November 2021, Parliament adopted an enabling law on the efficiency of civil proceedings and the revision of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) measures, together with directly applicable provisions on family law, forced execution and right of citizenship. It sets out the principle aiming to reduce the length of civil proceedings. A reduction of number of incoming cases in courts is envisaged through increased recourse to ADR mainly by strengthening mediation and arbitration , by introducing fiscal incentives and legal aid for those procedures, and by reviewing the current system of quantification and recoverability of legal fees to discourage frivolous litigations . A simplification of proceedings is envisaged by introducing the possibility to declare an appeal clearly unfounded, extending the cases where a single judge is competent to adjudicate and securing the implementation of binding timeframes for procedures especially at first instance. At the High Court of Cassation the filter section will be abolished and an accelerated procedure and a preliminary ruling procedure will be introduced . The reform aims at harmonising performances across courts through a monitoring system and incentives to accomplish standard performance. Together with staff recruitment (Office for the Trial) and increased digitalisation, implementing legislation, due by late 2022, is important in order to reach the final targets of the RRP . On 14 January 2022, the Minister of Justice established seven working groups to draft implementing legislation by 15 May 2022. A comprehensive long-awaited criminal justice reform has been adopted, aiming at addressing efficiency challenges. In the context of the RRP, Italy committed to reducing by 25% the disposition time at three instances of criminal justice by late 2026 . On 27 September 2021, Parliament adopted an enabling law on the efficiency of criminal trials and restorative justice, together with directly applicable provisions for a swift definition of criminal cases. It aims at reducing the length of criminal proceedings i.a. by extending the application of simplified procedures , broadening the use of digital technology , and defining time limits for the preliminary investigation . It also allows a wider intervention of the judge at the stage of the preliminary investigation, decreasing the number of cases at trial level , introducing a selective access at appeal level and new criteria which would allow to drop a case before trial. The reform seeks to harmonise performances across courts through a monitoring system and incentives to accomplish standard performance. Together with staff recruitment (Office for the Trial) and increased digitalisation, implementing legislation, due by late 2022, is important in order to reach final targets of the RRP . On 28 October 2021, the Minister of Justice established five working groups to draft implementing legislation by 30 April 2022, and by 15 May 2022 for restorative justice. On 14 April 2022, the Minister of Justice established an additional working group to draft implementing legislation by 20 June 2022 for criminal digital trial and office for the trail. II.Anti-Corruption Framework The National Anti-Corruption Authority is the main entity in charge of the prevention of corruption within the public administration sector, coordinating the National Anti-Corruption Plan and supervising the adoption of the local three-year anti-corruption action plans. The Anti-Corruption Unit of the Financial Police is responsible for the investigation and prevention of corruption as a specialised law enforcement body. As an independent authority at the Bank of Italy, the Financial Intelligence Unit provides support to the competent prosecutor’s office and cooperates with the Financial Police as the competent authority for receiving reports of suspicious financial transactions. To prevent and fight corruption in the allocation and implementation process of resources received under the RRP, consultative and control tasks have also been assigned to the Court of Auditors. The perception among experts and business executives is that the level of corruption in the public sector remains relatively high. In the 2021 Corruption Perceptions Index by Transparency International, Italy scores 56/100 and ranks 13th in the European Union and 42nd globally . The perception has significantly increased over the past five years . The 2022 Special Eurobarometer on Corruption shows that 89% of respondents consider corruption widespread in their country (EU average 68 %) and 32 % of respondents feel personally affected by corruption in their daily lives (EU average 24 %) . As regards businesses, 91 % of companies consider that corruption is widespread (EU average 63 %) and 41 % consider that that corruption is a problem when doing business (EU average 34 %) . Furthermore, 39 % of respondents find that there are enough successful prosecutions to deter people from corrupt practices (EU average 34 %) , while 29% of companies believe that people and businesses caught for bribing a senior official are appropriately punished (EU average 29 %) . A new National Anti-Corruption Plan (2022-2024) is planned to be in place by the end of the summer. The new National Anti-Corruption Plan, which is based on the main corruption prevention law , is Italy’s overarching strategy for corruption prevention. The finalisation of the new Plan was deliberately delayed to 2022 to align it with the new Decree creating an ‘integrated plan’ to coordinate anti-corruption prevention measures in line with the Italian RRP. The new plan sets out the main policy objectives for a period of three years, to be updated every year . The central theme for the new Plan is the use of the funds related to the RRP with a focus on public procurement and anti-corruption measures . It also provides overall support to the public administration in the design and implementation of entity-specific three-year action plans . According to a 2021 evaluation of the National Anti-Corruption Authority, the implementation of the entity-specific plans of 2019 was satisfactory .

Italy is committed to proactively monitor the impact of the criminal justice reform concerning corruption cases closed at appeal level without a verdict. The criminal justice reform was adopted in September 2021 . It aims at reducing the excessive disposition times that have been found to hamper, among others, Italy’s efforts to effectively prosecute and adjudicate corruption cases, jeopardising the right to a speedy trial and to good administration. The governing coalition found a compromise by suspending the limitation periods for first instance trial, including for proceedings concerning corruption, and instead set time limits on subsequent appeals. At the appeal level, corruption proceedings are amongst those which would automatically close after a lapse of time of two years , unless the judge requests an extension. The effectiveness of the reform will therefore require close monitoring with regard to the fight against corruption, particularly at the appeal level that Italy committed to undertake from the entry into force of the law . A referendum held on 12 June 2022 on the abolishment of the ‘Severino law’ prohibiting individuals convicted of serious crimes, including corruption, to run as candidates in European, national and regional elections for a period of six years did not pass . Cooperation between the relevant entities fighting corruption continues to work well, however, challenges remain as regard corruption vulnerabilities in public funds as well as the capacity to effectively prosecute foreign bribery . Overall, coordination and cooperation between the prosecution services, the Financial Police, the Financial Intelligence Unit, the Prosecutor’s Office at the Court of Auditors, the National Anti-Mafia Directorate and the Anti-Corruption Authority remains effective, including for high-level corruption cases, with increasingly effective information exchanges between them . In practice, challenges remain for investigators, in particular regarding the level of interconnection of the registries of the various entities that hold financial information of relevance to the fight against corruption. Investigators consider that they could benefit from further digitalisation and the use of artificial intelligence to enhance and speed-up the identification of suspects and the evidence-gathering, including in high-level corruption cases . Areas where most cases of corruption occur remain the public administration and public tendering, with increasing vulnerabilities in the renewable energy and construction sectors . Despite important legislative developments , lack of resources, limited experience and insufficient legal expertise continue to undermine the capacity of law enforcement authorities to pursue and prosecute foreign bribery effectively . As a major exporter, Italy had dropped from active to moderate enforcement regarding foreign bribery , although attention to this form of crime has significantly increased compared to ten years ago . Concerns exist as to the legislative proposal on conflicts of interest for political office holders, including parliamentarians, which remains pending in Parliament for several years. The proposal includes a definition of conflicts of interest and the introduction of stricter integrity measures for members of national, regional and local government offices . Until the new law is adopted and enters into force, legislation on conflicts of interest remains fragmented . A Code of Conduct for Ethics has not been adopted . Similarly, no further developments have taken place with regard to the mandatory publication of asset declarations for members of the Chamber of Deputies and the Senate, which remains fragmented and non-transparent . A new lobbying law passed the lower house of Parliament. In January 2022, the Chamber of Deputies approved one of the draft legislative proposals on lobbying presented in the course of 2018 and 2019 . The draft law proposes the establishment of an electronic, mandatory register of interest representatives. Concerns have been raised with regard to the limited scope proposed, exempting business associations, trade unions and religious entities from the obligation to register despite their relevance in representing interests in the decision-making process . Further, the one year cooling-off period for former members of the national and regional governments following the termination of their activities to prevent ‘revolving doors’ does not extend to former members of Parliament . The introduction of a ‘legislative footprint’ would enhance transparency as to who seeks to influence specific pieces of legislation. The approval of the draft law by the Senate is planned for the beginning of 2023. Until an operational lobby register, including a ‘legislative footprint’, is set up, regulation of lobbying vis-à-vis the government will remain fragmented . Risks of corruption in political party financing raise public attention. 2022 saw several corruption cases under investigation, prosecution, and adjudication for violation of the law on political parties’ public funding , including high-ranking political figures . In this context, the practice of channelling donations through political foundations and associations before they are transferred to political parties present an obstacle to public accountability, as such transactions are difficult to trace and monitor . Italy prohibits direct public funding to political parties, including for political campaigns. Political parties are therefore required to finance themselves almost exclusively through private donations from individual donors or legal entities . This is seen as one reason why members of Parliament often rely on their own resources to fund political campaigns, making political actors more dependent on private donations and more vulnerable to undue influence . There is a relatively high ceiling for direct private donations at EUR 100 000 per year. The rules on the transparency of financing to political organisations in force since 2019 oblige parties to publish data on donations . Donations over EUR 500, received in money or in-kind, need to be published along with the donor’s identity within one month from the date of reception. Failure to comply with the publication requirement is subject to an administrative fine of three to five times the value of the non-reported donation. Foreign donations are banned. However, publicly available information is stored in different formats and not evenly structured, which limits possibilites of public monitoring impacting on accountability . A centralised, single, machine-readable register is not in place, which would help to ensure that such political party and campaign finance information is made available in a coherent, understandable and timely manner . Concerns also exist as to the capacities and resources of the oversight and supervisory bodies . Amendments to the whistleblower law remain to be adopted but were already at the final legislative stage at the time of the 2021 report. Due to the time that lapsed during the process, only the adoption of a new enabling law is necessary for the Government to further revise Italy’s stand-alone whistleblower law . The enabling law was also already approved by the Chamber of Deputies on 16 December 2021 and is now requiring the approval by the Senate. Once in force, the Government has 3 months to implement and follow up on the delegation . Until adoption, the protection of whistleblowers in the private sector remains limited as it is based on voluntary compliance programmes that not all companies have instituted . In practice, the Anti-Corruption Authority does not have the mandate to receive whistleblower disclosures from private sector employees or to issue sanctions . The extension of the scope of application to all companies with more than 50 workers will therefore be an important new level of protection for private sector whistleblowers. COVID-19 pandemic related corruption risks remain high, while corruption is increasingly used to infiltrate Italy’s legal economy. Heightened risks during the COVID-19 pandemic have in the course of 2021 turned into increased occurrence of corruption and corruption-related crimes with attempts by organised crime to infiltrate the legal economy presenting one of the main challenges in Italy’s fight against corruption . According to investigators, criminal networks have benefitted in particular from the pandemic-related needs of economically fragile SMEs and the procurement of state aid and public grants, with money being misused for other purposes and not being recovered . Concerns exist of similar trends with regard to the future procurements of public funds of the RRP due to its size . To significantly revise the Public Contracts Code and simplify the large amount of secondary implementing sources , a draft single regulation is currently under discussion in Parliament with an indicative timeline of adoption in the summer of 2022 . III.Media Pluralism and media freedom Freedom of expression and information, press freedom as well as the principle of transparency of media financing are enshrined in the Italian Constitution . A Press Law regulates the written press while the Italian Audiovisual Media Law, regulates audiovisual communications and establishes the independent media regulator, the Authority for Guaranteeing Communications (AGCOM) and the legal framework for the managament and monitoring of Italian public service media. Italy’s Freedom of Information Act regulates ‘civic access’ to data and documents held by the public administration. A specialised Coordination Centre monitors acts of intimidation against journalists. The regulator for audiovisual media services continues to function independently and effectively , including in its monitoring of public bodies’ advertising expenditure. By virtue of a specific provision of Legislative Decree no. 208/2021, all Italian public administrative bodies that purchase advertising space in mass media outlets are obliged to inform AGCOM about their advertising expenditures for the previous financial year. The law establishes a set of criteria which determine how such expenditure shall be spent, namely that at least 15% shall be spent on advertisements broadcast on private local television stations and local radio stations operating in the territories of the EU Member States and that at least 50% of such expenditure shall be spent on advertisements published in daily newspapers and magazines. AGCOM may levy fines of up to EUR 5 200 on such public authorities if they do not adhere to these obligations. The MPM 2022 concludes, once more, that the independence of the media regulator presents low risk given that ‘the appointments procedures and the rules on budgetary independence of the authority are designed to minimise the risk of political or economic interference’. With regard to the disbursement of state advertising, the MPM 2022 maintains its low risk evaluation given that Italy possesses elaborate legislation on state advertising while pointing out, however, that ‘such rules are limited to the public administration and do not extend to the publicly owned companies’. Public service media in Italy is regulated by means of a multilayered monitoring system. The key legislative provisions are enshrined in Legislative Decree no. 208/2021 which establishes the precise services which public service media shall guarantee . The law stipulates that the concession of public radio, television and multimedia service is granted by the state for periods of 10 years following a public consultation relating to public service obligations. In practice this concession is granted and renewed in favour of one company, RAI-Radiotelevisione italiana S.p.a. RAI’s Board of Directors, made up of seven members and elected for a three-year period renewable once, carries out administrative functions and ensures that the aims and obligations of the general public service broadcasting are fulfilled. Two members are elected by the Chamber of Deputies, by the Senate and by the Council of Ministers respectively, on a proposal by the Minister of Economy and Finance . Another member is appointed from among the employees of the company itself. The Board appoints its chairperson but such appointment is dependent on the assent of the Parliamentary Committee for the General Guidelines and Supervision of Broadcasting Services , to which the Board shall report every six months prior to the approval of its financial statements. This Parliamentary Committee typically addresses hundreds of questions per year, relating to RAI’s compliance with its public service function, to RAI’s Board of Directors. RAI is financed by means of an annual fee, established and adjusted by the Ministry of Economy and Finance, levied on subscribers to the service, as well as by means of advertising revenues. The media regulator, AGCOM, monitors the respect by RAI of those audiovisual content rules under AGCOM’s control . The MPM 2022 considers that this remains a high risk area given that the reforms along the years have failed to substantially shelter the public service media board of directors from political influence and that the amount of the revenue devolved to public service media is determined on a yearly basis by the government via the Budget Law. . The laws on defamation have not been amended and remain a key area of concern for journalists and organisations representing them. As reported in the 2021 Rule of Law Report, the Constitutional Court held that Article 13 of the Press Law - as far as it provides for the penalty of imprisonment for press defamation - is unconstitutional and incompatible with Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights . However, there have been no amendments to the Italian laws regulating libel, either civil or criminal. Several libel cases, often entailing lengthy proceedings, have an effect akin to local strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs) . The MPM 2022 points out that following the aforementioned Constitutional Court ruling, the prison sentence for defamation has practically been abolished in Italy. It however highlights the increasing prevalence of SLAPP cases and concludes that ‘the combination of criminal and civil defamation can be used with a chilling effect on journalistic activity’. A Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) report published following MFRR’s recent mission to Italy highlights the extent to which various types of legal threats are having a tangible adverse effect on investigative and independent journalism in the country. Cases of physical attacks, death threats and other forms of intimidation against journalists have continued to rise. Since the 2021 Rule of Law Report, 12 alerts concerning Italy were registered by the Council of Europe’s Platform to promote the protection of journalism and safety of journalists . Six of those cases concern court proceedings in civil or criminal cases brought against journalists or media outlets. The remaining cases concern assault and intimidation of journalists covering COVID-19 pandemic related events and stories, cases of physical and sexual assault, death threats and the raiding of the offices of a newspaper by unkonown individuals. Despite the repeated requests made by the Italian Press Association, the protection of journalistic sources and the framework law on the professional secrecy of journalists remain inadequate . As a result, the MPM 2022, once more rates the indicator on journalistic profession, standards and protection as medium risk but has slightly increased its risk score within that band. As in past years, both the MPM 2022 and several stakeholders continue to flag the deterioration of journalists' working conditions, characterised by a growing gap between employed journalists and freelancers and a generalised reduction in newsroom staff, as an issue of major concern . While the Ministry of Interior continues to monitor the cases of physical attacks and other threats against journalists via the specialised Coordination Centre, cases of intimidation have continued to rise. The latest statistics made available by the Coordination Centre reveal that, in 2021, 232 acts of intimidation were recorded (a 42% increase over the previous year) of which 11% concerned organised crime and 49% were of a ‘political-social nature’. 44% of all cases of intimidation occur on line, on social media networks or by email . The above-mentioned MFRR report recognises the value of the Coordination Centre but suggests Italy should consider additional measures under the Centre’s remit – such as looking more closely at threats appearing on social media platforms - given the dramatic scenario on the ground. A series of economic measures in the form of tax credits introduced in 2021, aimed at mitigating the impact of the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic on the media and based on a series of objective criteria, have continued to provide support to the sector. IV.Other Institutional Issues related to Checks and Balances Italy is a unitary parliamentary republic with an indirectly elected President . The Parliament is bicameral: it comprises the Chamber of Deputies and the Senate, both having the same powers. The right of legislative initiative is vested in the Government, the members of Parliament, 50 000 citizens, the National Council for Economics and Labour , and the Regional Council. The Constitutional Court decides in exclusivity on disputes regarding the constitutionality of laws. There is currently no national human rights institution, and several regional ombudspersons are responsible for safeguarding the freedoms and rights of persons . The Inter-ministerial Committee for Human Rights (CIDU) is the coordinating national institution interacting with civil society, academia, and all relevant stakeholders to ensure reporting and follow-up on human rights issues. The Parliament and the Constitutional Court have continued to exercise scrutiny over restrictive measures taken in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, while the emergency regime has recently ended. In 2021, rules governing the emergency situation were introduced primarly by Decree laws with subsequent scrutiny by Parliament, while the Decrees of the President of the Council of Ministers were used in a limited manner. On 22 October 2021, the Constitutional Court declared that Decrees of the President of the Council of Ministers related to the COVID-19 pandemic comply with the legality principle. On 1 April 2022, the emergency regime ended. The emergency regime adopted on 31 January 2020 was last renewed until 31 March 2022. The discussion on the establishment of a special bicameral Commission to be consulted on any act of the Government related to the pandemic is still ongoing in the Senate, but became less urgent following the adoption of Decree-laws for countering the situation in 2021. On 1 January 2022, Italy had 58 leading judgments of the European Court of Human Rights pending implementation . At that time, Italy’s rate of leading judgments from the past 10 years that remained pending was at 58% and the average time that the judgments had been pending implementation was over 5 years and 10 months . The oldest leading judgment, pending for 25 years, concerns the excessive length of criminal and administrative proceedings . On 1 July 2022, the number of leading judgments pending implementation has increased to 59 . A National Human Rights Institution remains to be established. The creation of a National Human Rights Institution (NHRI) remains a concern as it continues to be subject to debates and no relevant progress has been realised. Three draft laws aimed at establishing such institution have been unified in one single draft law with a view to creating a National Commission for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights and the Fight against Discrimination, a NHRI in line with the Paris Principles and recommendations from the United Nations. The timetable for the work of the First Committee is being drawn-up in order to examine the amendments. In November 2021, the Government reiterated its full support for the establishment of this institution and the Minister of Foreign Affairs recently indicated the need to expedite this process. The civic space remains narrowed, in particular for civil society organisations dealing with migrants. Despite some improvements noted in the 2021 Rule of Law Report, the civic space continues to be assessed as narrowed. During 2021, Italian Courts discharged NGOs that carried out search and rescue operations in the Mediterranean. These NGOs had been accused by authorities of facilitating irregular migrations and irregular borders crossing.Stakeholders reported that forms of intimidation against civil society organisations (CSOs) dealing with migrants’ rights persist. No developments have been reported as regards the complexity of the registration process for NGOs and delays in the implementation of the law harmonising rules on the non-profit sector. However, the RRP provides for the establishment of a permanent advisory board including CSOs to promote democratic participation. Additional funds have been allocated to CSOs through an extraordinary fund for the support of the third sector due to the COVID-19 pandemic and social bonus for organisations providing funds to civil society. Annex I: List of sources in alphabetical order*

* The list of contributions received in the context of the consultation for the 2022 Rule of Law report can be found at https://ec.europa.eu/info/publications/2022-rule-law-report-targeted-stakeholder-consultation_en . ANSA (2022), League treasurer gets 8 mts for illegal party funding, (14 March 2022), https://www.ansa.it/english/news/politics/2022/03/14/league-treasurer-gets-8-mts-for-illegal-party-funding_5f57f3e6-083e-4ed5-b432-39bbdb98ad6a.html Articolo 19 (2022), Written contribution from Articolo 19 in the context of the country visit. Centre for Media Pluralism and Media Freedom (2022), Media pluralism monitor 2022 – country report on Italy. CEPEJ (2021), Study on the functioning of the judicial systems in the EU Member States. Chamber of Deputies, Act No. 196-721-1827-A, Legislative Proposal No. 196 of 23 March 2018 Discipline of the activity of representation of special interests and establishment of the public register of interest representatives (196), https://www.camera.it/leg18/126?tab=1&leg=18&idDocumento=196&sede=&tipo = Chamber of Deputies, Proposal No. n. 1827, Discipline of the activity of institutional relations for the representation of interests, http://documenti.camera.it/leg18/pdl/pdf/leg.18.pdl.camera.196_A.18PDL0153920.pdf Chamber of Deputies, Proposal No. n. 721, Rules on the transparency of relations between the representatives of special interests and members of the Government and the leaders of the state administrations; http://documenti.camera.it/leg18/pdl/pdf/leg.18.pdl.camera.196_A.18PDL0153920.pdf Chamber of Deputies (2022), Stenographic report of the Assembly Session No. 639. Civicus, Monitor tracking civic space – Italy https://monitor.civicus.org/country/italy/ . Civil Liberties Union for Europe (2022), Contribution from Civil Liberties Union for Europe for the 2022 Rule of Law Report. Constitutional Court (2021), Press release, ‘Press defamation: imprisonment only in cases of extreme severity’ (‘Diffamazione a mezzo stampa: carcere solo nei casi di eccezionale gravità’) https://www.cortecostituzionale.it/documenti/comunicatistampa/CC_CS_20210622191846.pdf . Constitutional Court, judgments of 16 February 2022, Decisions No. 56 to 60 of 16 February 2022, ECLI:IT:COST:2022:56 to ECLI:IT:COST:2022:60. Constitutional Court, judgment of 27 October 2021, 198/2021, ECLI:IT:COST:2021:198. Council of Europe: Committee of Ministers (2010), Recommendation CM/Rec(2010)12 of the Committee of Ministers to member states on judges: independence, efficiency and responsibilities. Council of Europe: Consultative Council of European Judges (2014), Opinion of the Consultative Council of European Judges on the evaluation of judges’ work, the quality of justice and respect for judicial independence (CCJE(2014)2). Council of Europe: Consultative Council of European Judges (2021), Opinion of the Consultative Council of European Judges on the evolution of the Councils for the Judiciary and their role in independent and impartial judicial systems (CCJE(2021)11). Council of Europe, Platform to promote the protection of journalism and safety of journalists – Italy https://fom.coe.int/en/alerte?years=2022&typeData=1&time=1653914309287 . Council of State (2022), Written contribution from the Council of State in the context of the country visit. Court of Auditors (2022), Written contribution from the Court of Auditors in the context of the country visit.

Court of Cassation (2022), Written contribution from the Court of Cassation in the context of the country visit. Directive (EU) 2016/343 on the strengthening of certain aspects of the presumption of innocence and of the right to be present at the trial in criminal proceedings. Directive (EU) 2018/1808 amending Directive 2010/13/EU on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the provision of audiovisual media services (Audiovisual Media Services Directive) in view of changing market realities. Directive (EU) 2019/1937 on the protection of persons who report breaches of Union law. Directorate-General for Communication (2019), Flash Eurobarometer 482: businesses’ attitudes towards corruption in the EU. Directorate-General for Communication (2020), Special Eurobarometer 502: corruption. Directorate-General for Communication (2022), Flash Eurobarometer 507: businesses’ attitudes towards corruption in the EU. Directorate-General for Communication (2022), Special Eurobarometer 523: corruption. European Association of Judges (2022), Contribution from the European Association of Judges for the 2022 Rule of Law Report. European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (2022), ‘Who’s afraid of journalists? The MFRR Italy Mission Report’ https://www.ecpmf.eu/who-is-afraid-of-journalists-the-mfrr-italy-mission-report/ . European Civic Forum (2022), Contribution from the European Civic Forum for the 2022 Rule of Law Report. European Commission (2020), 2020 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Italy. European Commission (2021), 2021 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Italy. European Commission (2022), EU Justice Scoreboard. European Commission (2022), Country report Italy, SWD(2022) 616 final. European Court of Human Rights, judgment of 2 September 1997, Abenavoli v. Italy, 24487/94. European Court of Human Rights, judgment of 12 May 1999, Ledonne v Italy, 35742/97. European Implementation Network (2022), Contribution from the European Implementation Network for the 2022 Rule of Law Report. Franet, Fondazione “Giacomo Brodolini” (2022), Country research - Legal environment and space of civil society organisations in supporting fundamental rights – Italy, Vienna, EU Agency for Fundamental Rights, https://fra.europa.eu/en/publication/2022/civic-space-2022-update#country-related . GRECO (2017), Fourth Evaluation Round – Evaluation Report on Italy on corruption prevention in respect of members of parliament, judges and prosecutors.

GRECO (2019), Third Evaluation Round – Second Addendum to the Second Compliance Report on Italy on incriminations and transparency of party funding. GRECO (2021), Fourth Evaluation Round – Second Compliance Report on Italy on corruption prevention in respect of members of parliament, judges and prosecutors. Guardia di Finanza (2022), Written contribution from Guardia di Finanza in the context of the country visit. High Council for the Judiciary (Consiglio Superiore della Magistratura - CSM) (2021), Decision of 13 October 2021. High Council for the Judiciary (Consiglio Superiore della Magistratura - CSM) (2022), Decision of 23 February 2022. High Council for the Judiciary (Consiglio Superiore della Magistratura - CSM) (2022), Decision of 16 March 2022. High Council for the Judiciary (Consiglio Superiore della Magistratura - CSM) (2021), Memorandum of Understanding of 22 December 2021 with the Ministry of Justice and the National School for the Judiciary. High Council for the Judiciary (Consiglio Superiore della Magistratura - CSM) (2021), Opinion of 21 April 2021. High Council for the Judiciary (Consiglio Superiore della Magistratura - CSM) (2021), Opinion of 29 July 2021. High Council for the Judiciary (Consiglio Superiore della Magistratura - CSM) (2021), Opinion of 23 March 2022. High Council for the Judiciary (Consiglio Superiore della Magistratura - CSM) (2021), Memorandum of Understanding of 21 December 2021 with the Ministry of Justice and the National School for the Judiciary. High Council for the Judiciary (Consiglio Superiore della Magistratura - CSM) (2022), Written contribution from the High Council for the Judiciary (Consiglio Superiore della Magistratura - CSM) in the context of the country visit. High Court of Cassation (2022), 2022 Report of the First President. High Court of Cassation (2022), Written contribution from the High Court of Cassation in the context of the country visit. Italian Government (2022), National Recovery and Resilience Plan https://www.governo.it/sites/governo.it/files/PNRR.pdf . Italian Government (2022), Input from Italy for the 2022 Rule of Law Report. Italian Parliament (2022), Written contribution from the Italian Parliament in the context of the country visit. Italian Press Federation (2022), Contribution from the Italian Press Federation for the 2022 Rule of Law Report. Italian Press Federation (2022), Contribution from the Italian Press Federation in the context of the country visit. L’Espresso (2021), ‘The search engine for private funding to Italian parties’ (‘Il motore di ricerca dei finanziamenti privati ai partiti italiani’) https://espresso.repubblica.it/politica/2021/12/03/news/finanziamenti_privati_politica_motore_ricerca-328551368/ .

Ministry of Interior (2021), Coordination Centre for monitoring, analysis and permanent exchange of information on acts of intimidation against journalists https://www.interno.gov.it/it/ministero/osservatori-commissioni-e-centri-coordinamento/centro-coordinamento-sul-fenomeno-atti-intimidatori-nei-confronti-dei-giornalisti . Minister of Interior (2022), Report to the Parliament on activities and results achieved by the Anti-Mafia Investigation Directorate in January-June 2021 (Relazione del Ministro dell’Interno al Parlamento: attivita svolta e risultati conseguiti dalla Direzione Investigativa Antimafia, Gennaio – Giugno 2021) https://direzioneinvestigativaantimafia.interno.gov.it/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/Relazione_Sem_I_2021.pdf . Minister of Interior (2022), Results of the 2022 referendum. https://elezioni.interno.gov.it/referendum/scrutini/20220612/scrutiniFI Ministry of Interior (2022), Written contribution from the Ministry of Interior in the context of the country visit. Ministry of Justice (2020), 2021-2023 Three-year Plan Ministry of Justice (2022), Written contribution from the Ministry of Justice in the context of the country visit. National Anti-Corruption Authority (2022), Contribution from the National Anti-Corruption Authority for the 2022 Rule of Law Report. National Association of Magistrates (2022), Written contribution from the National Association of Magistrates in the context of the country visit. OECD (2017), Statement of the OECD Working Group on Bribery on Italy's implementation of the Anti-Bribery Convention https://www.oecd.org/italy/statement-of-the-oecd-working-group-on-bribery-on-italy-implementation-of-the-anti-bribery-convention.htm . OECD (2021), Working Group on Bribery: 2020 Enforcement of the Anti-Bribery Convention https://www.oecd.org/daf/anti-bribery/OECD-Anti-Bribery-Convention-Enforcement-Data-2021.pdf . Office of the Trial, Council Recommendations of 2013-2020 on the efficiency of the Italian justice system. Ossigeno per l’informazione (2022), Written contribution from Ossigeno per l’informazione in the context of the country visit. Politico (2022), ‘Italy’s Matteo Renzi charged with illegal party financing’ https://www.politico.eu/article/italys-matteo-renzi-charged-with-illegal-party-financing/ Reporters without Borders – Italy https://rsf.org/en/country/italy . The Good Lobby (2022), ‘Lobbying law has been approved and is welcomed, although with shortcomings’ (‘Legge sul lobbying: bene l’approvazione ma è un compromesso al ribasso’) https://www.thegoodlobby.it/comunicato-stampa/legge-sul-lobbying-bene-lapprovazione-ma-e-un-compromesso-al-ribasso/ . Transparency International (2017), Connecting the Dots: Building the Case for Open Data to Fight Corruption https://www.transparency.org/en/publications/connecting-the-dots-building-the-case-for-open-data-to-fight-corruption#:~:text=In%202015%2C%20the%20G20%20Anti-Corruption%20Open%20Data%20Principles,for%20using%20open%20data%20to%20strengthen%20anti-corruption%20efforts . Transparency International (2020), Exporting corruption 2020 https://images.transparencycdn.org/images/2020_Report-Full_Exporting-Corruption_EN.pdf . Transparency International (2020), Debugging democracy: Open data for political integrity in Europe https://www.transparency.org/en/publications/debugging-democracy-open-data-for-political-integrity-in-europe . Transparency International Italy (2020), ‘Money and policy: What do the data tell us?’ (‘Soldi e politica: Cosa di dicono I dati?’) https://www.transparency.it/informati/blog/soldi-e-politica-cosa-ci-dicono-i-dati . Transparency International-Italia, TheGoodLobby (2021), Black Lobby: Proposals on Financing Politics, https://www.transparency.it/informati/news/lobby-nera-proposte-su-finanziamento-alla-politica .

Transparency International (2022), Corruption Perceptions Index 2021 https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi/2021/index/ita . UN OHCHR Regional Office for Europe (2022), Contribution from the UN OHCHR Regional Office for Europe for the 2022 Rule of Law Report.



Annex II: Country visit to Italy The Commission services held virtual meetings in March and April 2022 with: ·A buon diritto ·AGCOM (Media Authority) ·National Association of Magistrates (ANM) ·Anti-corruption Agency (ANAC) ·Anti-corruption Unit of the Financial Police ·Anti-mafia and Anti-terrorism National Directorate (DNAA) ·Articolo 21 ·CILD ·Constitutional Court (Corte Costituzionale) ·Council of State (Consiglio di Stato) ·Court of Auditors and Prosecutor’s Office at the Court of Auditors ·High Court of Cassation ·High Council for the Judiciary ·In difesa di ·l’Associazione Italiana Donne per lo Sviluppo – AIDOS

·Italian Bar Association (Consiglio Nazionale Forense) ·Libera ·Ministry of Interior ·Ministry of Justice ·National Press Association and European Union of Journalists ·Ossigeno per l’informazione ·Presidency of the Council of Ministers, Department for European Policies ·Prosecution Service of the High Court of Cassation ·Rai Radiotelevisione italiana, Relazioni istituzionali ·The Good Lobby * The Commission also met the following organisations in a number of horizontal meetings: ·Amnesty International ·Article 19 ·Civil Liberties Union for Europe ·Civil Society Europe ·European Centre for Press and Media Freedom ·European Civic Forum ·European Federation of Journalists ·European Partnership for Democracy