These days it is under discussion in parliament a controversial draft law on the use, approval and publication of the wiretaps and the environment.
The bill has already been approved in the Senate and is being debated in the House.
Howl plant its sign here today because he believes that little information is being done around this measure which, in fact, gagging information and gives a considerable help to those who commit crimes.
But in order ... What is this law?
intercepts to date are regulated by art. 266 and following of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which stipulate that the interception of telephone conversations or communications are possible only for certain offenses such as not culpable for crimes which are expected to imprisonment or confinement in more than five years, crimes relating to smuggling, drugs, weapons, explosives etc..
As an investigative tool that greatly restricts some freedoms enshrined in the Constitution, the procedure for approval of interceptions is rather complex, but if you do not forgive Howl sets out in detail because each of you, followers of the sign, can be obtained through the network . Howl suggests, to start, the link to wikipedia:
http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intercettazione
However, what Howl is pressed to clarify the aspects of the media.
To date, the publication placed under secret of wiretaps is not allowed. That's the theory, since many times this rule is been ignored. However, the interception marked confidential may be disclosed in the press. It is then up to the ethics, and mind you, not only to the morality of the journalist, choose what information to publish in order to report the news. Unfortunately in Italy there have been scandals in which intercepts were published containing information not related crimes, but rather would certainly reprehensible, but not illegal.
This is obviously wrong both morally and professionally.
However, the benefits accruing to the wiretapping law enforcement inquiries are absolutely paramount in such cases of violation of privacy. Think of the drug trade cut off intercepting the "courier" and the drug dealer or mafia fugitives identified starting with their communications with family members.
Yet the bill under consideration in Parliament these days would undermine the benefits of all investigations. Follow Howl as you illustrate this devilry:
- The text will always involve the use of wiretaps to a limited circle of crime as is already happening now, and this is wise.
- Provides, however, that there is " there are obvious signs of guilt " (not crime), which means that if a penitent says "Tom is the perpetrator ..." must first have evidence that Tom is a smuggler and then you can catch. It 's a twisted concept ... If I have the evidence of guilt to intercept him what to do?
- Interceptions can take up to 60 days, which is not sold out will be able to do more eavesdropping on that offense. You understand well that is absurd, because if the investigator is aware of a crime on the 60th day of interception, can no longer intercept the suspect.
- The eavesdropping will be possible only in places where there is reason to believe that you will make the offense. That is, if you're investigating a drug trafficking and you will want to find out where the burden of environmental drug interception, the interception will be made only reach the exact location where narcotics. It 'too convoluted to explain ...
There are a number of other technical revisions designed to make it difficult even to make the request of interceptions. Howl
leave to our readers on the above findings and apologizes for the partisanship of the comments.
addition to technical constraints, however, these rules break down a large part of the right to information. In fact, we state that it is forbidden for publishers to publish not only the intercepts as secret, but even those not marked confidential! May not publish or report deletions or paraphrase passages of interceptions, but above all it can include information relating to the inquiries (non-judicial proceedings, investigations ) against anyone. If this law were in force today, you would know nothing of the "case Scajola, or the infamous list Anemone etc.. Etc.. The editors of the newspapers that violate the publication ban will be fined up to € 465mila and for journalists violate the rule is expected to imprisonment for up to 30 days or a fine up to € 5 thousand or up to 10 thousand in the case of interception.
Howl I hope I was clear in expounding the provisions of this bill and I hope you were shocked as it was Howl.
For those who are against this decree Howl recommended link www.nobavaglio.it
How many are in favor of this decree, Howl was unable to find a site that supports the bill, but I invite all who are in favor of finding a protected site and contact decree of Howl so that it can insert the link in this article and make fair exchange of views. Thanks.
0 comments:
Post a Comment