Library

Italy: Landmark ruling in press freedom case

Italy: Landmark ruling in press freedom case

The Media Freedom Rapid Response consortium welcomes yesterday’s acquittal of writer and journalist Roberto Saviano in a case brought by current Italy’s  Minister of Infrastructure and Transport Matteo Salvini, setting a landmark ruling for press freedom and freedom of expression in Italy.

17 April 2026

Versione italiana di seguito

On April 16, 2026, the Criminal Court of Rome acquitted Saviano of criminal defamation, rejecting both the public prosecutor’s request for a €10,000 fine and the additional €100,000 damages sought by Salvini’s legal team.

 

The case was initiated by Minister Matteo Salvini in response to a number of social media posts authored by Saviano in June 2018,in which he had criticized Salvini’s anti-migrant and xenophobic rhetoric and policies. In those social media contents, Saviano also spoke out against  Salvini’s repeated threats to revoke the police protection granted to him since 2006. Saviano further called him “minister of the underworld”, echoing an essay by journalist and historian Gaetano Salvemini who had criticized the stance of the pre-fascist Giolitti government towards the Southern regions of Italy in the early 20th century. Salvini’s lawsuit further targeted an interview Saviano gave to the German news outlet Süddeutsche Zeitung in 2018, alleging that the writer had referred to a non-aggression pact between Italian criminal organizations and the Ministry of the Interior – an accusation that the court ultimately proved to be unfounded over the course of the trial. Notably, Salvini filed the lawsuit when he was Minister of the Interior on official Ministry of the Interior letterhead, adding a further element of institutional pressure and intimidation to the case.

 

The case represents a textbook example of a  Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP). It highlights a clear imbalance of power, with a politically influential claimant pursuing disproportionate legal action and excessive remedies in response to Saviano’s criticism. His reporting addressed matters of public interest, including on migration, minority rights, and the relationship between national political leadership and Southern Italy. Finally, Salvini’s lawsuit appears to be part of a broader pattern of sustained attacks and delegitimization targeting the writer. This case also reflects broader patterns in which legal action is used to deter scrutiny and silence critical voices.

 

In a context marked by an alarming trend of high-ranking public officials resorting to legal harassment to silence criticism, this ruling stands as a watershed moment affirming the right to hold those in power to account, an important test for the health of Italian democracy.

 

The court’s reasoning in this acquittal, which will be made available in three months, will be crucial in shaping future case law in Italy. The ruling does align with the interpretation of Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, as reiterated by the European Court of Human Rights, according to which public figures should tolerate a higher degree of criticism and scrutiny due to their prominent position in society.

 

While welcoming this important outcome, the MFRR consortium reiterates the urgent need for the Italian Parliament to fully decriminalize defamation and align national legislation with international freedom of expression standards. Criminal defamation laws are inherently open to abuse and have a chilling effect on legitimate public interest reporting and commentary. This reform should go hand in hand with a comprehensive reform of civil law, including robust safeguards against SLAPPs in both domestic and cross-border cases, and across all types of proceedings. 

 

With the deadline for transposing the EU Anti-SLAPP Directive – also known as Daphne’s Law – approaching next month, Italy must act promptly, including by incorporating both the EU Recommendation (2022/758) and the Council of Europe Recommendation CM/Rec(2024)2.

 

Only comprehensive and effectively implemented legal safeguards can protect journalists and other public watchdogs from abusive litigation and enable them to report on matters of public interest without fear of legal harassment or retaliation.

Italia: sentenza storica per la libertà di stampa

Il consorzio Media Freedom Rapid Response esprime soddisfazione per l’assoluzione, pronunciata ieri, dello scrittore e giornalista Roberto Saviano in un procedimento intentato dall’attuale ministro italiano delle Infrastrutture e dei Trasporti Matteo Salvini: una sentenza storica per la libertà di stampa e la libertà di espressione in Italia.

 

Il 16 aprile 2026, il Tribunale penale di Roma ha assolto Saviano dall’accusa di diffamazione aggravata a mezzo stampa, rigettando sia la richiesta del pubblico ministero di una multa di 10.000 euro sia la richiesta di risarcimento danni di ulteriori 100.000 euro avanzata dalla difesa di Salvini.

 

Il procedimento è stato avviato da Matteo Salvini, all’epoca ministro dell’Interno, in risposta a una serie di post pubblicati sui social media da Saviano nel giugno 2018, nei quali quest’ultimo aveva criticato la retorica e le politiche anti-migranti e xenofobe di Salvini. Contenuti social in cui Saviano si era anche espresso contro le ripetute minacce di Salvini di revoca della scorta che gli era stata concessa dal 2006. Saviano lo aveva inoltre definito “ministro della malavita”, riprendendo un saggio del giornalista e storico Gaetano Salvemini che aveva criticato la posizione del governo prefascista di Giolitti nei confronti delle regioni meridionali d’Italia all’inizio del XX secolo. Tra i fatti oggetto della querela presentata da Salvini rientrava anche un’intervista rilasciata da Saviano al quotidiano tedesco Süddeutsche Zeitung nel 2018, in cui, secondo l’ex ministro dell’interno, lo scrittore avrebbefatto riferimento a un patto di non aggressione tra le organizzazioni criminali italiane e il Ministero dell’Interno – un’accusa che il tribunale ha dimostrato essere infondata nel corso del processo. Al momento di proposizione della querela, Salvini ha formalizzato l’atto su carta intestata ufficiale del Ministero, introducendo così un ulteriore elemento di pressione di natura istituzionale.

 

Il caso costituisce un esempio da manuale di SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation), alias azione legale vessatoria. Esso mette in luce un evidente squilibrio di potere, con un ricorrente politicamente influente che intraprende un’azione legale sproporzionata e chiede un risarcimento eccessivo in risposta alle critiche di Saviano. I contenuti formulati dallo scrittore trattavano questioni di interesse pubblico, tra cui la migrazione, i diritti delle minoranze e il rapporto tra la leadership politica nazionale ed il Sud Italia. Infine, la causa intentata da Salvini sembra inserirsi in un quadro più ampio di attacchi continui e di delegittimazione nei confronti dello scrittore. Questo caso riflette un fenomeno di ampia portata attraverso cui le azioni legali vengono utilizzate per scoraggiare lo scrutinio e mettere a tacere le voci dissenzienti.

 

In un contesto caratterizzato da una tendenza allarmante che vede funzionari pubblici di altissimo livello ricorrere a forme di molestie legali per mettere a tacere le critiche, questa decisione rappresenta un momento spartiacque nell’affermazione del diritto di criticare il potere e chiedere conto dell’operato di chi quel potere lo esercita, un test importante per la salute della democrazia italiana.

 

La motivazione della sentenza di assoluzione, che sarà resa pubblica tra tre mesi, sarà determinante per l’evoluzione della giurisprudenza in Italia. La sentenza è in linea con l’interpretazione dell’articolo 10 della Convenzione europea dei diritti dell’uomo, come ribadito dalla Corte europea dei diritti dell’uomo, secondo cui i personaggi pubblici devono tollerare un livello più elevato di critica e di scrutinio proprio in virtù della loro posizione di rilievo nella società.

 

Pur accogliendo con favore questo importante risultato, il consorzio MFRR ribadisce con urgenza l’appello al Parlamento italiano affinché proceda con la completa depenalizzazione della diffamazione, ed allinei la legislazione nazionale agli standard internazionali in materia di libertà di espressione. Le leggi penali sulla diffamazione sono intrinsecamente soggette ad abusi e hanno un effetto dissuasivo sulla legittima attività giornalistica e di interesse pubblico. Questa riforma dovrebbe andare di pari passo con una riforma del codice civile, che includa solide tutele contro le SLAPP sia nei casi nazionali che transfrontalieri, e in tutti i tipi di procedimenti. 

 

Con l’avvicinarsi, il prossimo mese, della scadenza per il recepimento della direttiva UE anti-SLAPP – nota anche come «Legge di Daphne» – l’Italia deve agire tempestivamente, recependo sia la raccomandazione dell’UE (2022/758) sia la raccomandazione del Consiglio d’Europa CM/Rec(2024)2.

 

Solo garanzie giuridiche piene ed effettivamente applicate possono proteggere giornalisti, attivisti, whistleblower e gli altri guardiani della democrazia da azioni legali vessatorie, consentendo loro di occuparsi di questioni di interesse pubblico senza il timore di ritorsioni o strumentalizzazioni del diritto.

Signed by:

  • Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT)
  • European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
  • European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
  • ARTICLE 19 Europe
  • Free Press Unlimited
  • International Press Institute (IPI)

This statement was coordinated by the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR), a Europe-wide mechanism which tracks, monitors and responds to violations of press and media freedom in EU Member States and Candidate Countries.

Allgemein

Italy: MFRR flags ongoing media freedom erosion

Italy: MFRR flags ongoing media freedom erosion

Media freedom in Italy has continued its overall downward trajectory in the past two years, amidst the car bomb attack on one of the country’s most famous journalists, new spyware attacks on reporters, politicisation of the public broadcaster, legal harassment of journalists by governing politicians, and continued concerns over media pluralism, partner organisations of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) said today.

11.03.2026

Italiano

The findings of the MFRR consortium, shared at a press conference in Rome following a follow-up advocacy mission on 9-10 March, conclude that since our organisations’ previous visit to Italy in 2024 the climate for press freedom and independent journalism has faced serious pressures under the coalition government of Prime Minister Georgia Meloni.

 

MFRR organisations stress that key reforms such as the transposition of the EU Anti-SLAPP Directive lack ambition, are limited to a minimal transposition of the Directive, and appear unlikely to be implemented by the May 2026 deadline. Italy also appears to be in active violation of the new European Media Freedom Act (EMFA) regarding the political control over Radiotelevisione Italiana (RAI).

 

Although Italy continues to have strong constitutional protections for the freedom of the press, several negative developments in the last year – combined with the lack of implementation of key reforms – have contributed to a further weakening of the landscape for press and media freedom.

 

RAI and EMFA

Since the EMFA came into full effect in August 2025, the continued government influence over the management, politicised appointments, and the subsequent axing of shows and exodus of journalists from RAI, has been in our view a clear violation Article 5 of EMFA, which obliges Member States to guarantee the independence of public broadcasters.

 

While RAI has long faced politicisation under successive administrations, MFRR partners stress that the scale and intensity of the current government’s overhaul stands out in modern Italian history. This overt effort to shift the editorial line at RAI has utilised the same tactics on show in the EU’s worst media freedom offenders. This political influence over RAI is permitted due to flaws in the legislation, which cements the control of the governing majority over the Board of Directors and other key positions.

 

Coupled with this undue political influence, in the past year RAI has also faced additional budget cuts, undermining the need for stable and sustainable funding outlined under Article 5 of EMFA. Meanwhile, the paralysis of the parliamentary oversight committee of RAI, and its ongoing inability to oversee the public broadcaster’s compliance with independence and pluralism, is weakening democratic scrutiny of the broadcaster and causing additional institutional instability.

 

A bill currently being debated in parliament which would reform the governance system of RAI to remove board appointments by the executive branch and instead switch to a simple parliamentary majority, effectively the governing coalition, is likely to entrench political influence over the RAI board. If passed in its current form, MFRR partners do not believe the bill would align Italy’s public broadcasting system with Article 5 of EMFA.

 

Spyware

In 2025, Italy was the only country in the EU to experience new cases of spyware surveillance of journalists, according to MFRR monitoring, making it a European flashpoint for the abuse of spyware-for-hire technology against the press. So far, no accountability has been secured for these illegal violations of journalistic privacy and source protection. During a meeting with representatives of the Ministry of Justice, no clarity was provided on the ongoing judicial investigations into the known spyware attacks on at least three Italian journalists.

 

Our organisations welcome the recent breakthrough in the prosecutorial investigation which has confirmed that the Graphite spyware sold by Israeli firm Paragon Solutions was illegally used to hack into the mobile device of Fanpage.it director Francesco Cancellato. Traces of the Graphite surveillance tool, known to be used by the intelligence services AISI and AISE, were confirmed on the devices of Cancellato and two activists, with meaningful correspondence of the date and time of the deployment of the intrusive software. The prosecutors stress that questions remain over who is behind this illegal surveillance of the journalist, and that the investigation continues. Two other cases of spyware attacks on Italian journalists in 2025, Ciro Pellegrino and Roberto D’Agostino, remain unresolved.

 

These worrying cases are a reminder of the urgency of the application of the provisions contained in the Article 4 of the European Media Freedom Act, and the necessary harmonisation of the Italian legal framework to the highest standards in terms of protection of journalistic confidentiality and transparency on access of personal data.

 

SLAPPs

In the legal sphere, Italy also remained the country in Europe with the highest number of Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs) in 2025, according to the CASE Coalition, which multiple MFRR organisations are part of. Combined with ongoing existence of criminal defamation laws that rank among the strictest in Europe, and a phenomenon in which SLAPPs are too often initiated by high ranking public officials, MFRR partners conclude that journalists in Italy face acute legal risks compared to colleagues in other EU countries.

 

A parliamentary bill has set the framework regarding the transposition of the EU anti-SLAPP Directive. However, the delegation understands that the government will only address cross-border SLAPPs, rather than also domestic SLAPPs, as outlined in the April 2024 Council of Europe Recommendation on countering SLAPPs.

 

The likelihood of the EU’s anti-SLAPP transposition being completed by the deadline in May 2026 appears increasingly remote, leaving journalists exposed to legal threats. Full decriminalisation of defamation in Italy, combined with comprehensive reform of the civil code, including strong anti-SLAPP provisions for both domestic and cross border SLAPPs, remains the only acceptable outcome.

 

Pluralism and safety

During the mission, MFRR partners also discussed the approved sale of the media assets of GEDI. The deal, which will reportedly see La Stampa sold to Gruppo SAE and La Repubblica sold to Greek-owned Antenna, has raised alarm from its staff over potential job losses and potential threats to its editorial independence. To address these concerns, MFRR calls on the Italian media regulator, AGCOM, to request a media merger assessment from the new EMFA-created European Board of Media Services, which should take up the case and assess it through the lens of media pluralism and editorial independence. Given the importance of La Repubblica and La Stampa in the Italian media ecosystem, MFRR partners believe AGCOM has a responsibility to request European scrutiny and ensure the deal will not negatively impact the news outlet’s editorial freedoms.

 

Regarding the safety of journalists, the near-miss car bomb attack on Report presenter Sigfrido Ranucci in October 2025 was a shocking attack on the journalistic profession in Italy which, if successful, would have been the most high-profile killing of a journalist in Europe in decades. The attack serves as a chilling reminder of the threats faced by journalists conducting investigative journalism in Italy. So far, no perpetrators have been identified or prosecuted and impunity for this case continues.

 

Overall, despite almost two years of political pressures on RAI, the Italian government has yet to face any serious pushback from the European Union over what MFRR partners consider a clear violation of the EMFA. While the EU Commission has signaled some concern over media freedom and specifically RAI in the annual Rule of Law Report, there has been no meaningful scrutiny or major EU pushback.

Mission partners thank all stakeholders that met the delegation in Rome and remain open to further exchanges with national stakeholders, particularly from the governing parties, on media freedom in Italy. A full report of the findings of the mission will be published in the coming weeks.

 

The mission to Italy was led by the European Federation of Journalists (EFJ) and was joined by partners of the MFRR consortium: European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF), Free Press Unlimited (FPU), the International Press Institute (IPI), and Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT).

This mission was coordinated by the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR), a Europe-wide mechanism which tracks, monitors and responds to violations of press and media freedom in EU Member States and Candidate Countries.

Italia: MFRR segnala la continua erosione della libertà di stampa

 

La libertà di stampa in Italia continua la sua traiettoria discendente degli ultimi due anni, fra l’attentato con autobomba ad uno dei giornalisti più famosi del paese, i nuovi attacchi spyware ai giornalisti, la politicizzazione dell’emittente pubblica, le molestie legali ai giornalisti da parte dei politici al governo e le continue preoccupazioni sul pluralismo dei media, hanno affermato le organizzazioni partner del Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) (MFRR).

 

I risultati, condivisi in una conferenza stampa a Roma a seguito di una missione di advocacy di follow-up del 9-10 marzo, mostrano che dalla precedente visita in Italia del 2024, il clima per la libertà di stampa e il giornalismo indipendente ha subito gravi pressioni sotto il governo di coalizione del primo ministro Giorgia Meloni.

 

MFRR sottolinea che riforme chiave come il recepimento della Direttiva UE Anti-SLAPP mancano di ambizione, si limitano ad un recepimento minimo della Direttiva e difficilmente verranno attuate entro la scadenza di maggio 2026. L’Italia sembra inoltre violare attivamente il nuovo European Media Freedom Act (EMFA) per quanto riguarda il controllo politico sulla Radiotelevisione Italiana (RAI).

 

Sebbene l’Italia continui a godere di solide tutele costituzionali per la libertà di stampa, diversi sviluppi negativi nell’ultimo anno, uniti alla mancata attuazione di riforme chiave, hanno contribuito ad un ulteriore indebolimento del panorama della libertà di stampa e dei media.

 

RAI e EMFA

Dall’entrata in vigore dell’EMFA nell’agosto 2025, la continua influenza del governo sulla dirigenza, le nomine politicizzate e la successiva soppressione di programmi e l’esodo di giornalisti dalla RAI hanno rappresentato, a nostro avviso, una chiara violazione dell’articolo 5 dell’EMFA, che obbliga gli Stati membri a garantire l’indipendenza delle emittenti pubbliche.

 

Se la RAI subisce da tempo la politicizzazione attuata dai governi di turno, i partner di MFRR sottolineano che la portata e l’intensità della riforma dell’attuale governo sono di particolare rilievo nella storia italiana moderna. Questo palese tentativo di modificare la linea editoriale della RAI ha utilizzato le stesse tattiche utilizzate nei paesi più in violazione della libertà di stampa nell’UE. Questa influenza politica sulla RAI è resa possibile da carenze legislative che consolidano il controllo della maggioranza di governo sul Consiglio di Amministrazione e su altre posizioni chiave.

 

A questa indebita influenza politica si sono aggiunti, nell’ultimo anno, ulteriori tagli al bilancio della RAI, che compromettono la necessità di finanziamenti stabili e sostenibili, come previsto dall’articolo 5 dell’EMFA. Nel frattempo, la paralisi della commissione parlamentare di controllo della RAI e la sua continua incapacità di vigilare sul rispetto dell’indipendenza e del pluralismo da parte dell’emittente pubblica stanno indebolendo il controllo democratico dell’emittente, causando ulteriore instabilità istituzionale.

 

Un disegno di legge attualmente in discussione in Parlamento, che riformerebbe il sistema di governance della RAI per eliminare le nomine del consiglio di amministrazione da parte dell’esecutivo e passare invece ad una semplice maggioranza parlamentare, di fatto la coalizione di governo, rischia di consolidare l’influenza politica sul consiglio di amministrazione della RAI. Secondo MFRR il disegno di legge, se approvato nella sua forma attuale, non allineerebbe il sistema radiotelevisivo pubblico italiano all’articolo 5 dell’EMFA.

 

Spyware

Nel 2025, l’Italia è stato l’unico paese dell’UE a registrare nuovi casi di sorveglianza tramite spyware ai danni dei giornalisti, secondo il monitoraggio MFRR, diventando un focolaio europeo per l’abuso di tecnologie spyware a pagamento contro la stampa. Finora, non è stata accertata alcuna responsabilità per queste violazioni illegali della privacy giornalistica e della protezione delle fonti. Durante un incontro con i rappresentanti del ministero della Giustizia, non è stata fatta chiarezza sulle indagini giudiziarie in corso sui noti attacchi spyware ad almeno tre giornalisti italiani.

 

Le nostre organizzazioni accolgono con favore la recente svolta nell’indagine della procura che ha confermato che lo spyware Graphite, venduto dall’azienda israeliana Paragon Solutions, è stato utilizzato illegalmente per hackerare il dispositivo mobile del direttore di Fanpage.it Francesco Cancellato. Tracce del software di sorveglianza Graphite, noto per essere utilizzato dai servizi segreti AISI e AISE, sono state confermate sui dispositivi di Cancellato e di due attivisti, con una corrispondenza significativa di data e ora di installazione del software spia. I procuratori sottolineano che restano dubbi su chi sia dietro questa sorveglianza illegale del giornalista e che le indagini proseguono. Altri due casi di attacchi spyware ai danni di giornalisti italiani nel 2025, Ciro Pellegrino e Roberto D’Agostino, rimangono irrisolti.

 

Questi casi preoccupanti ci ricordano l’urgenza di applicare le disposizioni contenute nell’articolo 4 dell’European Media Freedom Act e la necessaria armonizzazione del quadro giuridico italiano ai più elevati standard in termini di tutela del segreto giornalistico e trasparenza sull’accesso ai dati personali.

 

SLAPP

In ambito legale, l’Italia rimane anche il Paese europeo con il più alto numero di cause legali strategiche contro la partecipazione pubblica (SLAPP) nel 2025, secondo la Coalizione CASE, di cui fanno parte diverse organizzazioni MFRR. Considerando anche l’esistenza di leggi penali sulla diffamazione tra le più severe in Europa e il fenomeno per cui le SLAPP sono troppo spesso avviate da alti funzionari pubblici, i partner MFRR concludono che i giornalisti in Italia corrono gravi rischi legali rispetto ai colleghi di altri Paesi dell’UE.

 

Un disegno di legge parlamentare ha definito il quadro normativo per il recepimento della Direttiva UE anti-SLAPP. Tuttavia, la delegazione è consapevole che il governo affronterà solo le SLAPP transfrontaliere, anziché anche quelle nazionali, come delineato nella Raccomandazione del Consiglio d’Europa dell’aprile 2024 sulla lotta alle SLAPP.

 

La probabilità che il recepimento della direttiva anti-SLAPP da parte dell’UE venga completato entro la scadenza di maggio 2026 appare sempre più remota, esponendo i giornalisti a minacce legali. La completa depenalizzazione della diffamazione in Italia, unita ad una riforma completa del codice civile, che includa severe disposizioni anti-SLAPP per le SLAPP sia nazionali che transfrontaliere, rimane l’unica soluzione accettabile.

 

Pluralismo e sicurezza

Durante la missione, i partner MFRR hanno anche discusso della vendita approvata delle attività mediatiche di GEDI. L’accordo, che secondo quanto riferito vedrà La Stampa venduta al Gruppo SAE e La Repubblica venduta alla società greca Antenna, ha suscitato l’allarme del personale per la potenziale perdita di posti di lavoro e le potenziali minacce alla sua indipendenza editoriale. Per affrontare queste preoccupazioni, MFRR chiede all’autorità di regolamentazione dei media italiana, AGCOM, di richiedere una valutazione della fusione mediatica al nuovo Consiglio europeo dei servizi media creato dall’EMFA, che dovrebbe occuparsi del caso e valutarlo attraverso la lente del pluralismo dei media e dell’indipendenza editoriale. Data l’importanza di La Repubblica e La Stampa nell’ecosistema mediatico italiano, MFRR ritiene che AGCOM abbia la responsabilità di richiedere un controllo europeo e garantire che l’accordo non abbia un impatto negativo sulla libertà editoriale dell’agenzia di stampa.

 

Per quanto riguarda la sicurezza dei giornalisti, l’attentato con autobomba contro il presentatore di Report, Sigfrido Ranucci di ottobre 2025 è stato un attacco sconvolgente alla professione giornalistica in Italia che, se avesse avuto successo, sarebbe stato il più eclatante omicidio di un giornalista in Europa degli ultimi decenni. L’attacco è un agghiacciante promemoria delle minacce che i giornalisti investigativi in Italia devono affrontare. Finora, nessun autore è stato identificato o perseguito e questo caso rimane impunito.

 

Nel complesso, nonostante quasi due anni di pressioni politiche sulla RAI, il governo italiano non ha ancora dovuto affrontare alcuna seria reazione da parte dell’Unione Europea su quella che i partner del MFRR considerano una chiara violazione dell’EMFA. Se la Commissione Europea ha espresso una certa preoccupazione per la libertà dei media e in particolare per la RAI nella Relazione annuale sullo Stato di diritto, non vi è stata alcuna analisi o reazione significativa da parte dell’UE.

I partner della missione ringraziano tutti gli stakeholder che hanno incontrato la delegazione a Roma e rimangono aperti a ulteriori scambi con gli stakeholder nazionali, in particolare con i partiti di governo, sulla libertà di stampa in Italia. Un rapporto completo sui risultati della missione sarà pubblicato nelle prossime settimane.

 

La missione in Italia è stata guidata dalla Federazione Europea dei Giornalisti (EFJ) e vi hanno partecipato i partner del consorzio MFRR: Centro Europeo per la Libertà di Stampa e dei Media (ECPMF), Free Press Unlimited (FPU), International Press Institute (IPI) e Osservatorio Balcani e Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT).

This mission was coordinated by the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR), a Europe-wide mechanism which tracks, monitors and responds to violations of press and media freedom in EU Member States and Candidate Countries.

Library

Italy: MFRR to conduct follow-up media freedom mission to…

Italy: MFRR to conduct follow-up media freedom mission to Rome

The Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) partners will conduct an advocacy mission to Rome, Italy, on 9–10 March 2026 to assess key developments affecting press and media freedom in the country and push for implementation of crucial reforms. 

18.02.2026

Italiano

The mission will focus on four main themes: the reform of the public broadcaster RAI and its compliance with the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA); the transposition of the EU Anti-SLAPP Directive and broader defamation reform; digital threats and the use of surveillance against journalists; and media market concentration and its compatibility with the EMFA. 

 

The decision to return to Italy two years after the MFRR’s urgent mission to Rome in May 2024 reflects great concerns with the implementation of EMFA and findings from the MFRR’s latest monitoring report, which documented 118 press freedom violations in Italy in 2025. These cases included physical attacks, legal harassment, major spyware cases, and an attempted assassination of prominent journalist Sigfrido Ranucci. These developments point to ongoing structural threats to journalists’ safety, editorial independence, and media pluralism in Italy.

 

The delegation will engage with institutional and political actors, as well as with representatives of the leadership of RAI, media experts, journalists’ organisations, and media professionals. As in all MFRR country missions, the consortium has requested meetings with a wide range of stakeholders to ensure a balanced and comprehensive assessment of the situation on the ground.

 

The 2024 mission report, Silencing the Fourth Estate: Italy’s democratic drift, outlined a series of recommendations to address concerns regarding political interference in RAI, legal harassment of journalists and other threats to media pluralism. The March 2026 mission will assess developments since then and continue dialogue with national stakeholders.

 

The mission led by the European Federation of Journalists (EFJ) and will be carried out with partners of the MFRR consortium: ARTICLE 19 Europe, the European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF), Free Press Unlimited (FPU), the International Press Institute (IPI), and Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT).

 

The delegation will work in coordination with local partners Amnesty International Italia, the Federazione Nazionale Stampa Italiana (FNSI), and the Unione Sindacale Giornalisti Rai (Usigrai).

 

A press conference will be held on Tuesday 10 March, from 11:45 to 13:00 CET at the premises of the Consiglio Nazionale Ordine dei Giornalisti, Via Sommacampagna 19, Rome, to present the preliminary findings of the mission.

 

The MFRR is a consortium of organisations committed to protecting media freedom across Europe. Through monitoring, support, advocacy, and country missions, the MFRR works to ensure a safer and more independent environment for journalists and media professionals. Further information about the mission and its outcomes will be published in the coming weeks.

Italia: il consorzio MFRR condurrà una missione dedicata alla libertà dei media a Roma

I partner del Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) organizzeranno una missione di advocacy a Roma, in Italia, il 9-10 marzo 2026 per valutare i principali sviluppi che influenzano la libertà di stampa e dei media nel paese e sollecitare l’attuazione di riforme cruciali. 

 

La missione si concentrerà su quattro temi principali: la riforma dell’emittente pubblica Rai e la sua conformità alla legge europea sulla libertà dei media (EMFA); il recepimento della direttiva UE Anti-SLAPP e la riforma in materia di diffamazione; le minacce digitali e l’uso della sorveglianza contro i giornalisti; la concentrazione del mercato dei media e la sua compatibilità con l’EMFA. 

 

La decisione di tornare in Italia due anni dopo la missione del consorzio MFRR a Roma nel maggio 2024 riflette le grandi preoccupazioni relative all’attuazione dell’EMFA e alle conclusioni dell’ultimo rapporto di monitoraggio MFRR, che ha documentato 118 violazioni della libertà di stampa in Italia nel 2025. I casi registrati dal report MFRR includono aggressioni fisiche, molestie legali, gravi casi di spionaggio informatico e l’attentato al giornalista Rai Sigfrido Ranucci. Questa tendenza segnala l’esistenza di minacce strutturali alla sicurezza dei giornalisti, all’indipendenza editoriale e al pluralismo dei media in Italia.

 

La delegazione si confronterà con attori istituzionali e politici, nonché con rappresentanti della dirigenza Rai, esperti dei media, organizzazioni di giornaliste e giornalisti. Come in tutte le missioni MFRR di advocacy, il consorzio ha richiesto incontri con un’ampia gamma di parti interessate per garantire una valutazione equilibrata e completa della situazione sul campo.

 

Nel rapporto della missione del 2024, intitolato Silenziare il Quarto Potere: La deriva democratica dell’Italia, il consorzio aveva delineato una serie di raccomandazioni per affrontare le preoccupazioni relative alle interferenze politiche nella Rai, alle azioni vessatorie nei confronti dei giornalisti e ad altre minacce al pluralismo dei media. La missione del marzo 2026 valuterà gli sviluppi intervenuti da allora e proseguirà il dialogo con le parti interessate a livello nazionale.

 

La missione è guidata dalla Federazione europea dei giornalisti (EFJ), e prenderanno parte alla missione gli altri partner del consorzio MFRR: ARTICLE 19 Europe, the European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF), Free Press Unlimited (FPU), the International Press Institute (IPI), e Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT).

 

La delegazione sarà affiancata dai partner locali: Amnesty International Italia, la Federazione Nazionale Stampa Italiana (FNSI), e l’Unione Sindacale Giornalisti Rai (Usigrai).

 

La mattina del 10 marzo si terrà una conferenza stampa presso la sede del Consiglio Nazionale Ordine dei Giornalisti, in Via Sommacampagna 19, Roma, per presentare i risultati preliminari della missione.

 

Il consorzio MFRR riunisce organizzazioni impegnate nella tutela della libertà dei media in tutta Europa. Attraverso attività di monitoraggio, sostegno, advocacy e missioni nei vari paesi, MFRR lavora per garantire un ambiente più sicuro e indipendente ai giornalisti e ai professionisti dei media. Ulteriori informazioni sulla missione e sui suoi risultati saranno pubblicate nelle prossime settimane.

Allgemein

Open letter regarding the dismissal of journalist Gabriele Nunziati

Open letter regarding the dismissal of journalist Gabriele Nunziati

The undersigned organisations of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) are writing to you to express our shared concern and dismay over the decision by Agenzia Nova to terminate its collaboration with journalist Gabriele Nunziati, following a question he addressed to the spokesperson of the European Commission on October 13, 2025.

12.11.2025

L’italiano è sotto

Da: redazione@balcanicaucaso.org 

A: redazione@agenzianova.com 

 

Direttore responsabile Riccardo Bormioli

Agenzia Nova. Agenzia di stampa quotidiana

Redazione Via Parigi 11, 00185 Roma

November 11, 2025

Subject: Concern over the dismissal of journalist Gabriele Nunziati

 

Dear Editor-in-Chief Bormioli,

 

The undersigned organisations of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) are writing to you to express our shared concern and dismay over the decision by Agenzia Nova to terminate its collaboration with journalist Gabriele Nunziati, following a question he addressed to the spokesperson of the European Commission on October 13, 2025.

 

As organisations dedicated to defending press freedom across Europe, we share the opinion that the dismissal of a journalist for asking a question deemed “inappropriate” to a representative of a political body represents a violation of media freedom and of the journalistic profession, which should be immediately remedied.

 

It is our view that the justifications provided by Agenzia Nova regarding the dismissal are neither convincing nor sufficient to justify this decision. They also serve to undermine the management’s asserted neutrality and objectivity. 

 

Journalists have both the right and the duty to ask questions, including critical or difficult ones, to ensure the democratic accountability of political decision-makers. Any attempt to silence such voices constitutes an unjustifiable form of censorship.

 

Nunziati was doing his job, professionally posing a legitimate question that sought to clarify the position of the European Commission regarding what UN experts have determined is the ongoing genocide in Gaza, a position that remains subject to legitimate questioning and public debate.

 

With respect to your concern about possible reputational damage, we believe that such damage does not stem from the legitimate work of your collaborator, but rather from the decision to censor his work on flawed grounds.

 

The silencing of those who carry out their watchdog role by posing legitimate public interest questions regarding the situation in Gaza represents a serious blow to freedom of information and a worrying sign for democracy in Italy, which harms not only journalists’ right to work without fear of retaliation but also citizens’ right to free, independent, and impartial information.

 

We therefore join the many organisations and colleagues, domestically and internationally, who have condemned what we consider to be an unfair and unjustified dismissal, express our solidarity with Gabriele Nunziati, and call on Agenzia Nova to review its decision and proceed with his immediate reinstatement.

Signed by:

  • Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT) 
  • European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
  • European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
  • Free Press Unlimited (FPU)

This statement was coordinated by the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR), a Europe-wide mechanism which tracks, monitors and responds to violations of press and media freedom in EU Member States and Candidate Countries.

Oggetto: Sconcerto per il licenziamento del giornalista Gabriele Nunziati

 

Gentile direttore Bormioli,

 

Le organizzazioni sottoscritte del consorzio europeo Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) le scrivono per esprimere il proprio sconcerto e la propria preoccupazione per la decisione dell’Agenzia Nova di terminare la collaborazione con il giornalista Gabriele Nunziati, a seguito di un quesito da lui rivolto alla portavoce della Commissione Europea lo scorso 13 ottobre 2025.

 

In quanto organizzazioni impegnate nella difesa della libertà di stampa in tutta Europa, condividiamo l’opinione che il licenziamento di un giornalista per aver posto una domanda ritenuta “fuori luogo” a una rappresentante di un organo politico rappresenti una chiara violazione della libertà dei media e della professione giornalistica, a cui andrebbe posto immediato rimedio. 

 

A nostro avviso, le giustificazioni fornite da Agenzia Nova in merito al licenziamento  non appaiono né condivisibili né sufficienti a giustificare la decisione. Tali spiegazioni contribuiscono inoltre a minare la presunta neutralità e obiettività della direzione. I giornalisti hanno il diritto e il dovere di porre domande, anche critiche o scomode, per garantire la responsabilità democratica dei decisori politici: qualsiasi tentativo di silenziare queste voci rappresenta una forma di censura ingiustificabile.

 

Nunziati ha esercitato il proprio lavoro, ponendo un quesito legittimo volto a chiarire la posizione della Commissione Europea riguardo alla situazione a Gaza che gli esperti delle Nazioni Unite hanno definito come genocidio, una posizione soggetta a legittimo scrutinio e dibattito pubblico. 

 

Rispetto alla vostra preoccupazione legata a un eventuale danno d’immagine, riteniamo che tale danno non derivi dal legittimo lavoro di un vostro collaboratore, quanto piuttosto dalla vostra stessa decisione di censurare tale lavoro su basi infondate.

 

Silenziare la voce di chi svolge il proprio ruolo da “cane da guardia” ponendo domande di pubblico interesse sulla situazione a Gaza rappresenta un grave colpo alla libertà di informazione e un segnale preoccupante per la democrazia in Italia. Ciò danneggia non solo il diritto dei giornalisti di lavorare senza timore di ritorsioni, ma anche quello dei cittadini a un’informazione libera, indipendente e imparziale.

 

Ci uniamo quindi alle numerose organizzazioni e ai colleghi, in Italia e all’estero,  che hanno condannato quello che consideriamo un licenziamento ingiusto e immotivato, esprimiamo la nostra solidarietà a Gabriele Nunziati, e invitiamo l’Agenzia Nova a rivedere la propria decisione e a procedere con il suo immediato reintegro.

Firmato:

  • Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT) 
  • European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
  • European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
  • Free Press Unlimited (FPU)
Library

Meloni’s Italy puts media freedom under pressure, regardless of…

Meloni’s Italy puts media freedom under pressure, regardless of EU rules

This article is part of a series published by IPI and written by expert guest contributors from across Europe on different threats facing media freedom and independent journalism. The views of the author do not necessarily reflect those of IPI.

29.10.2025

Francesca De Benedetti

Whether it is for the unaccounted use of spyware or a bomb exploding in front of an investigative journalist’s house, pressure against media freedom in Italy is growing in a disturbing trajectory.

 

Although an acceleration is underway, this alarming atmosphere has not come out of the blue. Since Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni’s far-right Brothers of Italy party entered government, over the past three years the deterioration of media freedom has become more and more visible.

 

Journalists have experienced a range of verbal and legal attacks, while ongoing efforts to erode the independence of and capture of the public broadcaster RAI have raised alarm from several organisations monitoring media pluralism.

 

This trend is consistent with the one seen in countries such as Hungary and Slovakia: wherever an illiberal playbook has been deployed, the capture of public media is often the first move.

 

In Meloni’s Italy, an unprecedented shift has taken place in recent months, drawing increasing concern at the European Union and beyond.

 

Hostile environment

 

On 16 October, a car bomb exploded outside the home of one of Italy’s top investigative journalists, Sigfrido Ranucci, host of in-depth reporting tv programme Report. The bomb went off 20 minutes after Ranucci’s daughter parked the car. No one was injured, but after long-time receiving intimidations, “this was a qualitative leap”, as Ranucci himself put it.

 

Although the authorities are investigating the incident and the entire political community in Italy has expressed its solidarity, the explosive attack comes amid ongoing verbal and legal attacks against Report and Ranucci himself by the governing majority.

 

Rai journalist Vittorio Di Trapani, President of the Italian National Press Federation (FNSI), told IPI that Ignazio La Russa, the co-founder of Brothers of Italy serving as Italy’s President of the Senate, had referred to Report as “serial slanderer” and governing party, Fratelli d’Italia, had sued Ranucci along with his colleague Giorgio Mottola.

 

Di Trapani added that “the political solidarity that has been expressed towards Ranucci was hypocritical, given all the attacks that have been launched against Report’s investigative journalism.” He indeed: “Four out of 28 episodes of the program were even removed from this year’s TV schedule”.

 

In 2023, Ranucci had even been summoned by the Parliamentary Committee for the general direction and supervision of radio and TV broadcasting, a move that the partner organisations of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) had condemned as “another intimidation practice targeting an independent investigative TV programme whose reporting has been critical of a number of members of the current government”.

 

In the following year, after Report’s investigation concerning Albania, both the Italian and Albanian Prime Ministers jointly attacked the public broadcaster’s journalists verbally. Meloni’s playbook of verbal attacks on independent media and attempts to delegitimize investigative journalism includes accusations of acting against the national interest or even serving specific political interests.

 

This increase in attacks is reflected in the 2025 Media Pluralism Monitor (MPM) report, published before the car bomb attacks, which stated that “there has been an increase in threats and intimidation against journalists, as well as several cases that reveal serious shortcomings in the protection of journalistic sources and of journalists themselves”.

 

Spyware attacks

 

In addition to physical attacks and continuous political pressure on RAI, Italy is also the EU member state which has seen the most recent cases of spyware attacks on journalists in the last year.

 

“Nine months have passed since Meta informed me that my mobile had been targeted with spyware made by Israel-based Paragon Solutions”, Francesco Cancellato, editor-in-chief of Fanpage, an Italian news outlet known for its investigative report The Meloni Youth, told IPI.

 

Over the past few months it has emerged that additional journalists, such as his colleague at Fanpage, Ciro Pellegrino, as well as stakeholders and representatives of civil society, have been spied on using surveillance tools.

 

Cancellato continued: “Paragon said that it can only provide answers if the Italian authorities ask it to do so. But Meloni’s government is burying its head in the sand. It has decided not to address any questions or concerns about what’s happened.

 

“Being asked about it in Parliament, the Prime Minister even dismissed the spyware affair as an unimportant, ‘election campaign issue’. I wasn’t even heard in an audition, neither at the Italian parliamentary committee on intelligence agencies nor at the LIBE Committee in the EU Parliament. My colleague Ciro wasn’t invited to speak either. Instead of being recognised by the institutions as journalists that are victims of spyware, we go through political isolation as if we were enemies”.

 

Until now, no one has been held accountable and the identity of those behind these illegal surveillance attacks remains unclear – mirroring a pattern of impunity for such spyware attacks elsewhere in Europe.

 

This case episode also evokes trends already seen elsewhere in Europe. In 2021, in Orbán’s Hungary, investigative journalists were on the list of those spied on with Pegasus; but the government dodged the issue without providing any accountability.

 

Illiberal trend vs EU law

 

In the face of growing threats against free and independent journalism across the bloc, the European Union has recently provided Europeans with new tools to protect media freedom.

 

The anti-SLAPP directive has been adopted and the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA) has been in full force since 8 August. But Italy is moving in the opposite direction.

 

In 2024, after monitoring 41 countries, the Coalition against SLAPPs in Europe (CASE) reported that Italy is the country it monitors with the highest number of Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation.

 

In recent years in Italy “we have witnessed an increasingly alarming resort to this form of legal harassment by high and very high-level public officials”, said Sielke Kelner, coordinator of CASE Italia and the advocacy officer at OBCT, adding it represented “a worrying sign of growing intolerance on the part of the ruling coalition towards any form of criticism.”

 

The Italian legislation still lacks a dedicated anti-SLAPP framework. A few weeks ago, the European delegation law 2025 – which allows transposition of EU directives into domestic law –  was presented in the Italian Parliament. However, the EU Directive 1069/2024, also known as “Daphne’s law”, was not included.

 

Meanwhile, EMFA is now in force and member states should act. In May 2024 the MFRR  organised an urgent mission to Italy. The subsequent report, Silencing the Fourth Estate: Italy’s Democratic Drift, confirmed that “since Giorgia Meloni took office as Prime Minister of Italy, the country’s public service broadcaster Rai has been facing an unprecedented level of political interference”.

 

According to Article 5 of EMFA, Italy must ensure that public service media providers are editorially and functionally independent and provide in an impartial manner a plurality of information and opinions to their audiences.

 

Despite these obligations, “the Italian authorities have done nothing” to implement the new EU obligations, said Di Trapani of FNSI. Instead, the government’s takeover of the public broadcaster keeps worsening, he added: “RAI has been without a president elected in accordance with the law for over a year now, and the term of office lasts three years.

 

“This is because the majority and the government want to impose a name but do not have enough votes to do so, and are therefore also blocking the work of the parliamentary committee that oversees RAI. So, essentially, the government is blocking parliament until it gets what it wants, and the Parliament cannot oversee RAI”.

 

Just when the European Union is becoming mature enough to recognise attacks on media freedom, there is a government in Rome that prefers to turn a blind eye.

Francesca De Benedetti is Senior Editor at the Italian daily Domani, where she covers European politics, as well as a fellow at IWM. De Benedetti writes columns for Vanity Fair and Jacobin (USA); her writing on Italian politics has been published by The Independent, Balkan Insight, Die Presse and other international outlets. De Benedetti previously worked as a reporter at la Repubblica and La7tv.

This guest article by IPI was commissioned part of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR), a Europe-wide mechanism which tracks, monitors and responds to violations of press and media freedom in EU Member States and Candidate Countries.

Allgemein

Italy: Car bomb attack on investigative journalist Sigfrido Ranucci…

Car bomb attack on investigative journalist Sigfrido Ranucci rings alarm for media freedom in Italy

The undersigned journalists and media freedom organisations strongly condemn the car bomb attack on one of Italy’s leading investigative journalist Sigfrido Ranucci and his family. We welcome the opening of an investigation by the Anti-Mafia Investigation Division and call for an urgent assessment of the effectiveness of the protective measures applied to the journalist.

17 October 2025

On 16 October 2025, at around 10 p.m. a bomb consisting of 1kg explosive detonated near the car of Rai journalist Sigfrido Ranucci in Pomezia, near Rome. The bomb went off 20 minutes after Ranucci’s daughter parked the car. No one was injured in the attack, which damaged the two vehicles and a nearby home.

 

Ranucci is a longtime host of Report, the investigative programme broadcast on Rai 3, known for its in-depth reporting on corruption and organised crime. In recent years, he has been the target of numerous threats and intimidation. He was granted police protection in 2010, which was enhanced in 2021, following threats from mafia-style organisation N’drangheta. 

“Last summer, a year ago, we found two P38 bullets outside our house. Since then, a series of unusual situations have occurred in recent months, starting with the attempt to discredit me,” he told Il Fatto Quotidiano. Earlier this year, Ranucci appeared before the European Parliament, where he denounced that he had been under surveillance by the Italian secret services.

 

Following the attack, Interior Minister Matteo Piantedosi said that he has given instructions to strengthen the journalist’s protection “to the maximum”. The journalist was provided with an armoured car and armed escort, as he himself announced when leaving offices of the Carabinieri, where he had filed a complaint. Opposition parties have urged the Anti-Mafia Committee in the parliament to grant an urgent hearing to Ranucci, in order to acquire his position on the case.

 

Ranucci joined the public broadcaster Rai in 1991 and devoted most of his career to investigative journalism. Recently, he has been vocal on the growing difficulties in carrying out investigative journalism in Italy, especially at Rai. He often highlighted the tensions with the management of the public broadcaster and the government, which ultimately culminated in a number of vexatious lawsuits and disciplinary measures against him. He also denounced that four episodes of his investigative programme Report had been cut following an unprecedented decision by the Rai management in the programme’s 30-year history. 

 

Alessandra Costante, the General Secretary of the Italian journalists’ trade union, the Federazione Nazionale Stampa Italiana (FNSI), said the attack on Sigfrido Ranucci was “setting democracy in Italy back by several decades”: “It is an attack not only on our colleague at Report, but on freedom of information, on Article 21 of the Constitution, on the basic principles of civil coexistence and democracy. The FNSI demands that clarity be provided quickly on what happened. The attack on Ranucci shows an escalation in actions against journalism,” she added. 

 

The editorial committee of Rai Approfondimento has called a meeting of editors in the Rai headquarters today at 12 p.m. This will be followed at 4 p.m. by a sit-in organised by FNSI, Usigrai and Stampa Romana together with colleagues from other editorial offices.

 

We stand alongside our Italian partners in expressing solidarity with Sigfrido Ranucci and the wider journalistic community in Italy. This attack is particularly troubling as it coincides with the anniversary of the death of Maltese journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia, who lost her life to a car bomb on 16 October 2017. 

 

The undersigned organisations strongly condemn the attempted murder of a journalist, which constitutes a direct assault on media freedom, and urgently call for a thorough investigation to ensure that the perpetrators are identified and brought to justice. 

Signed by:

  • European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
  • Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT) 
  • International Press Institute (IPI) 
  • European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
  • International Federation of Journalists (IFJ)
  • ARTICLE 19 Europe
  • Free Press Unlimited (FPU)

This statement was coordinated by the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR), a Europe-wide mechanism which tracks, monitors and responds to violations of press and media freedom in EU Member States and Candidate Countries.

Allgemein

Italy: Call for full transparency after Fanpage editor-in-chief surveilled…

Italy: Call for full transparency after Fanpage editor-in-chief surveilled with spyware

The Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) is urging Italian authorities to shed full light on the recent surveillance of an editor-in-chief in Italy and others using Graphite spyware technology developed by Israeli firm Paragon Solutions.

Our organisations are alarmed by the latest case of a journalist within the European Union having their secure communications and sources compromised using advanced spyware technologies, representing yet another serious attack on press freedom.

 

In the wake of recent revelations, we also urge other governments in Europe to launch investigations into targeted surveillance against any other journalists who it emerges have been affected by the same spyware technology.

 

On 1 February 2025, it was revealed that investigative journalist Francesco Cancellato, the editor-in-chief of Italian news outlet Fanpage, was among more than 90 individuals worldwide to have had their WhatsApp hacked using Graphite, a military-grade zero-click spyware sold by Paragon.

 

According to WhatsApp, which said it disrupted the spyware attacks in December 2024, this list included journalists and civil society members around the world. In the EU, it is understood that individuals were targeted in 13 Member States: Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Germany, Greece, Latvia, Lithuania, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, and Sweden.

 

The full scope of the spyware hacking, as well as the number of journalists who were among the 90 individuals worldwide who were targeted, is currently unknown. Cancellato is the only journalist to have come forward publicly so far. It is also unclear how long he was targeted for and to what extent his communications were compromised.

 

Fanpage has published recent high-profile investigations into the youth wing of the Prime Minister Georgia Meloni’s party, the ‘Brothers of Italy’. However Cancellato has not speculated on the reason he was targeted, or by whom, and said that he had never been told by any authorities that he was under investigation.

 

In the wake of the revelations, the Italian government confirmed that seven mobile phone users within the country had been targeted and has said that its law enforcement agencies do use spyware. However, Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni’s office has denied any involvement in the targeting of journalists and the government has not formally acknowledged the existence of a contract with Paragon.

 

However, according to multiple media reports Paragon has suspended or terminated at least one of its two contracts with the country due to the violation of its terms of use. Like other spyware firms, Paragon markets its products exclusively to state intelligence and law enforcement agencies from approved governments.

 

While investigations have been opened within Italy and the case has received parliamentary scrutiny, the actor ultimately responsible for deploying the spyware has yet to be disclosed. However, multiple factors point to the involvement of at least one state agency from within Italy.

 

The MFRR stresses the need for urgent and thorough investigations to identify the source of the surveillance and how many media professionals were affected, in which countries, for how long, and under what legal justification. Those responsible for the potentially illegal surveillance of journalists must be held to account and steps must be taken to assess why legal safeguards to protect journalists from undue surveillance were potentially ineffective in EU Member States.

 

Amidst a global proliferation in spyware capabilities and a record number of abuses against journalists and other civil society actors, our organisations further call for the EU to refocus its attention on assuring strict implementation of the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA), which sets out new protections for journalists inside the bloc from undue surveillance.

 

Under Article 4 of the EMFA, the use of spyware is banned except in very specific cases including investigations of serious crimes, and requiring judicial approval. Establishing how such surveillance against media actors in Italy and beyond was permitted under current legal regulations, and whether due diligence was followed, will be vital in the coming months.

 

Under Article 4.7 of the EMFA, journalists surveilled using spyware in the EU also have a right to know about the accessing and processing of their personal data in the context of the deployment of the surveillance measures or the deployment of intrusive surveillance software as part of a criminal investigation. MFRR therefore urges Italian authorities to ensure the relevant provisions are upheld in the case of Cancellato, and any other journalists in Italy who it emerges were also surveilled.

 

Given the seriousness of this case for media freedom and its EU-wide considerations, we further support the recent initiative of Italian MEPs to request that the European Parliament establish a Commission of Inquiry into the Graphite spyware case. We also support the recent initiative by the National Federation of the Italian Press (FNSI) and the National Order of Journalists to file a criminal complaint over the spyware hacks with the Rome Public Prosecutor’s Office.

 

Our organizations remain committed to advocating for the strongest possible regulations against spyware use against journalists and other civil society actors within the EU, and beyond, and will continue to assist journalists who believe they may have been targeted by spyware in connecting with experts for diagnostic tests on their mobile devices.

 

*If you are among the journalists within the EU to have received messages from Meta/WhatsApp about hacking in December 2024, please reach out to MFRR representatives at the following secure communication to discuss for device testing: contactMFRR@proton.me

Signed by:

  • International Press Institute (IPI)
  • Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT)
  • ARTICLE 19 Europe
  • European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
  • European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
  • Free Press Unlimited (FPU)

This statement was coordinated by the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR), a Europe-wide mechanism which tracks, monitors and responds to violations of press and media freedom in EU Member States, Candidate Countries and Ukraine.

Library

Trentino, journalism and gag complaints

Trentino, journalism and gag complaints

Between announced complaints and warnings, we heard from 4 newspaper editors, the union and an investigative journalist. First part of an investigation into the SLAPP phenomenon in Trentino.

 

By Paola Rosà

Originally published by OBCT. Also available in ITA.

“The way these complaints were written, I think they have one motivation: to try to stop the pen. They are written so poorly that they don’t stand a chance, but their intent is to send a message, to instill fear in the other party”. There is clarity and acumen in the words of the editor of the online newspaper Dolomiti, Luca Pianesi. All the complaints of the last few years – shelved and never brought to court – fit the definition of SLAPP, Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation.

 

The cases recalled by Pianesi share a harassing strategy, a casual use of the judicial system and an intimidating intent as well as the attempt to silence the debate. Like the SLAPPs, the 7 complaints and several warnings received by Pianesi over the last eight years (Dolomiti has been online since December 2016) have also shown much less noble objectives than defending the good name of those who claimed to feel damaged by the newspaper: “At the beginning we were subjected to much more pressure, phone calls, letters, but now I have thick skin. In 2022, for example, I received 4 complaints and 2 warnings, basically every two months I received a notfication. Yet I have never ended up in court”.

 

The underworld: unknown numbers and differing perceptions

While relatively little is heard about gag complaints in Trentino, credit goes to Luca Pianesi for touching on the subject publicly.

 

In a column dated November 21, Pianesi retraced the over two years that had passed between when he was notified of a senator’s complaint and when the judge for preliminary investigations decided to shelve the case, after the senator had opposed a similar decision by the public prosecutor: “For us, who have been hanging on this story for 2 years, all that’s left to do is write. Tellwhat happened”, he wrote.

 

“But for every one we talk about, there are 15 others that one has to deal with”, Pianesi, whom we met in the editorial office in Trento, tells us. “There’s an underworld that a journalist, a newspaper editor, supports on their shoulders, with their family, with their colleagues”.

 

Unfortunately, the extent of this “underworld” is unknown. Journalists here are reluctant to talk about it with outsiders, and when asked, they tend to downplay the extent of the phenomenon, as if the number of lawsuits were an indicator of poor quality journalism: complaints – even those filed by individuals in bad faith – still seem to be considered a professional disgrace, and each case is archived in silence, perhaps breathing a sigh of relief but without celebrations.

 

This seems to be confirmed by the director of the daily newspaper l’Adige, Pierluigi Depentori, who has been at the helm of the longest-running newspaper in the province for two years, and who claims that he has not yet ended up “in court for lawsuits filed during my time as editor”, as “in most cases we receive threats of lawsuits” (also part of an intimidation strategy).

 

According to Depentori, to protect themselves, journalists must keep up to date on legal rules and mechanisms: “To keep colleagues updated, I plan to repeat the training course with the lawyer who assists us”. But when faced with individuals who act “with bad faith and gross negligence”, as stated in Article 96 of the Civil Procedure Code on frivolous litigation, there is no training that can help: even the most careful and respectful journalist can be the victim of a specious lawsuit.

 

In Trentino, the situation seems to be in line with the rest of Italy. 4 newspaper editors (Pierluigi Depentori of l’Adige, Luca Pianesi of Dolomiti, Simone Casalini of T Quotidiano, Ettore Paris of the monthly investigative magazine  Questotrentino) and journalist Laura Mezzanotte, with different nuances, report a professional risk that puts work serenity to the test. They confirm

 

the abundance of at least warnings and, even though the cases are not many, they take very seriously the intimidating power of each individual complaint or request for compensation for damages.

 

Ettore Paris, despite enjoying the free assistance of several lawyers since the 1980s, recalls the tense climate in the editorial office, every time, even if the case is then shelved or acquitted: the request for damages of 800 million liras by a construction company, the 50,000 Euros requested by an MP, the complaint by a winery’s CEO, the lawsuit filed by Licio Gelli’s son. “It’s not about numbers, the intimidation is always there”.

 

The perception at the union is more serene. Rocco Cerone, reconfirmed as regional secretary of the National Federation of the Press for Trentino-Alto Adige/Südtirol, lets us know: “Although the phenomenon is alarming at a national level, on a regional basis it doesn’t seem to be so serious: at least there aren’t as many reports as in the rest of Italy”.

 

Promised complaints and warnings

The number of threatened  complaints is impossible to estimate: warnings, emails, registered letters or even just phone calls that, in Pianesi’s summary, say: “Don’t talk about me, or I’ll sue you”.

 

This is far from a marginal phenomenon in the galaxy of “legal” intimidation and the forcing of the legal system, a phenomenon that a few years ago the Otto Brenner Foundation of Frankfurt, in collaboration with the Gesellschaft für Freiheitsrechte e.V. (GFF) of Berlin, analysed in the volume “Wenn Sie das schreiben, verklage ich Sie!”. Studie zu präventiven Anwaltsstrategien gegenüber Medien (“If you write that, I will sue you! Preventive strategies of lawyers against media”).

 

According to the research, carried out in 2018 by consulting databases and interviewing 40 journalists and 20 lawyers in Germany, each newspaper receives on average at least 3 warnings per month. “These preventative strategies, which are increasingly frequent, increasingly aim to block the publication of an article or to influence public perception on the subject”.

 

Interference in journalism, and therefore in the right of citizens to be informed, is thus obvious, but known to few, as it is entrusted to the usually confidential correspondence between an external subject and the publisher, or director of the newspaper. But the phenomenon, as everyone in Trentino confirms, is quite widespread.

 

Luca Pianesi recalls an actual warning by one of the leaders of the Autostrada del Brennero: “Luckily that time we were not the only ones to have been warned, there were also our competitors from the daily newspaper l’Adige. And this allowed us to develop a common strategy and not be afraid”.

 

Having a legal office behind that assists the newspaper without the costs falling on individual journalists is obviously the recipe for serenity. “For us, as a cooperative – explains Pianesi – legal costs are a considerable burden. If it comes to a trial and an acquittal, the plaintiff can be ordered to pay our costs as well. But when the case is shelved, we have to pay the lawyer in full, like those two years with the senator that cost me 2000 Euros”.

 

An original case concerns a complaint that was only announced by MP Vittorio Sgarbi, president of the Mart museum of contemporary art of Rovereto and Trento. Simone Casalini recalls an email received from his publisher: Sgarbi contested some data published by the newspaper and said he was “forced to file a complaint”. Which in the end he did not.

 

“The message is always the same: I’ll let you know that I can sue you, but if you stay quiet I won’t”, explains Casalini, recalling how in these cases a “strong” publisher, in solidarity with the editorial staff and not willing to bend, is fundamental. “A large role is played by the dialogue between the editorial staff and the publisher”, he explains.

 

Monitoring, an impossible task

However, the issue with numbers seems to be above all their lack. “The communication strategy on complaints is decided by the lawyer”, confirms Laura Mezzanotte, a journalist for the monthly Questotrentino, sued in 2023 by the mayor of Riva del Garda and still awaiting a decision from the judge. “There are cases in which the lawyer recommends a settlement and paying, even if you could win in court. It is done for the sake of time, of convenience in relationships. In my opinion, the decision to speak publicly about a complaint depends only 10% on the individual journalist”.

 

Instead, according to Mezzanotte, we should think about a public register of gag lawsuits involving journalists, cases shelved or acquitted should be made public to provide a deterrent.

 

This is essentially what the European Commission asked for in the  Recommendation on SLAPP of April 2022, together with the issuing of what would become the directive adopted by the EU last spring, which however only concerns transnational cases because the Member States preferred to retain jurisdiction over national cases. The Commission had also sent Member States a list of wishes and indications for them to adopt “effective, appropriate and proportionate measures to address manifestly unfounded or abusive court proceedings against public participation and protect in particular journalists and human rights defenders against such proceedings”.

 

The paragraph on “data collection, communication and monitoring” opens as follows: “Member States should, taking into account their institutional arrangements on judicial statistics, entrust one or more authorities to be responsible to collect and aggregate, in full respect of data protection requirements, data on manifestly unfounded or abusive court proceedings against public participation initiated in their jurisdiction. Member States should ensure that one authority is responsible to coordinate the information and report the aggregated data collected at national level to the Commission on a yearly basis starting by the end of 2023”.

 

Over a year after that deadline, the Italian government does not appear to be drawing up that list, while monitoring is carried out by independent entities and NGOs, whether the trade union, associations or consortia like MFRR of which OBCT is a member. Monitoring untold cases is, however, an impossible task, as it is necessary to rely on the stories of the protagonists, who for various reasons often remain silent.

 

“For the most important cases, in the past, we published articles to tell readers about our acquittal regarding a defamation complaint”, the editor of l’Adige confirms; sometimes it happens, not always, and in any case very rarely during an ongoing proceeding.

 

From mayors to magistrates

A lawsuit still in progress involves Laura Mezzanotte, a journalist from Questotrentino sued by the mayor of Riva del Garda. Here the timing is very anomalous, and perhaps the “Romeo” investigation into the connections between business and politics, conducted by the Carabinieri of the ROS and the Guardia di Finanza and coordinated by the District Anti-Mafia Directorate of the Trento Prosecutor’s Office, plays a role. The case also involved the mayor, who ended up under house arrest in December 2024.

 

The contested article, in which Laura Mezzanotte asked who had financed the electoral campaign in Riva del Garda, was published in February 2023; in April the mayor filed a complaint for defamation; only over a year later, in September 2024, did the journalist receive notification. In the meantime, QT continues to write about the events in Garda (“There was no SLAPP effect here, we didn’t know we were being sued”, explains Mezzanotte).

 

The climate at the local level is tense, and when we ask our respondents who they fear most, they answer almost in unison: “The private sector”. While politicians “are more familiar with the game” (as Luca Pianesi puts it), accept the challenge of communication and somehow know how to take criticism, private companies are more “sensitive”, have powerful lawyers and are therefore more dangerous.

 

Magistrates have also targeted the press with legal actions. “I had not yet heard of it”, says Simone Casalini, director of T Quotidiano, “but this is exactly what is happening to us: two magistrates are suing us for defamation, and this only because, in a very balanced and sober judicial news article, we reported three lines from a leaflet critical of them”.

 

The territorial jurisdiction in this case has obviously been changed, and the editor is answering to the court of Brescia while waiting for the decision of the public prosecutor. “It is difficult for us to understand the reasons for an action of this kind, that article seemed truly watertight to me. Let’s see how it ends”.

 

Proposals and ideas in line with the EU

The wait, the tension and the actual costs of legal assistance are key elements of SLAPPs, and media workers are very clear about what the solutions could be, not so much to avoid complaints, which remain a right of readers, but to streamline procedures, to make things less traumatic, to reduce costs.

 

Among our respondents, even those who have not read the 2022 Recommendation, even those who were not aware of the activity of CASE, the European coalition against SLAPPs, and even those who had never heard of SLAPPs, end up suggesting solutions perfectly in line with the proposals of the European Union. Perhaps the only divergence concerns the decriminalisation of defamation. “God forbid – writes Laura Mezzanotte on QT – that instead of a criminal complaint someone who wants to silence you brings a civil lawsuit against you. There it is even worse: defense times and costs are much higher. And there is not even a filter of a judge who can decide to drop the case: the civil judge must continue the case in any case”. The journalist’s fears refer to the current situation, whereby the media are more willing to deal with criminal cases (according to data, archived at over 70%) than with civil cases (more expensive because a trial must be faced in any case, even five years after the publication of the contested article, while for the crime of defamation the complaint must be filed within three months). To bring Italy in line with international standards on freedom of expression, whereby there should be no crimes of opinion, the decriminalisation of defamation is instead requested by the bodies that deal with the issue, including the CASE coalition: in light of the recent Recommendation of the Council of Europe, any decriminalisation should in any case be accompanied by a simultaneous inclusion in civil law of those guarantees that are currently lacking. For the rest, the solutions proposed by journalists and directors interviewed for this overview of Trentino touch on the same issues, perhaps with a few more ideas, from reimbursement of expenses to the humanisation of the notification procedure.

 

“On a procedural level, we should be able to make the plaintiff pay the lawyer’s fees even in the event of dismissal”, suggests Pianesi of Dolomiti. “If it were known that in the event of dismissal the plaintiff must also pay the lawyer of the other party, there would be fewer complaints”. Those who defend themselves from a totally specious accusation, and formulated in bad faith, should be rewarded in some way; but if the case is dismissed, there is no one who can ascertain the plaintiff’s bad faith. “The compensation that arrives at the end of the trial is too late”, agrees Laura Mezzanotte, “in the meantime I had to pay the lawyer for who knows how many years”.

 

Timing remains the key point. Simone Casalini from il T suggests “faster trials, which lead to a reduction in costs and eliminate the real reasons for the complaint: if everything is resolved in three months, the editorial staff will be under no one’s thumb”.

 

“Sensitivity towards the problem – adds Laura Mezzanotte – should lead the prosecutors to take charge of the matter immediately. At the moment there is no fast track for matters of public interest or for journalism, so the times are completely arbitrary and such arbitrariness is risky”.

 

Some hope for a change in the way in which one is informed of a complaint or a request for compensation: “One of the things that bothered me the most – says Luca Pianesi – is the method of notification of the complaint which is absolutely unpredictable: once the carabinieri arrived at my house in uniform, my partner was there with my child. The notification may arrive by mail at home, or at the editorial office, or via phone call from the barracks. Each time a different procedure, you never know… not to mention the notification notice that you have to go and collect at the post office after three days. When it’s a fine I’m very happy, I breathe a sigh of relief!”.

Library

Mettere a tacere il quarto potere: la deriva democratica…

Report di missione: Mettere a tacere il quarto potere: la deriva democratica dell’Italia

La libertà dei media in Italia è sotto attacco, una deriva caratterizzata da una crescente interferenza politica e molestie legali nei confronti dei giornalisti. In vista delle elezioni europee del 2024, il Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) ha condotto una missione di carattere urgente a Roma per approfondire queste problematiche. Lo scorso luglio, in occasione del lancio del report in inglese, abbiamo presentato le conclusioni nel corso di un webinar dedicato, avanzando una serie di proposte per rafforzare la tutela della libertà dei media in Italia.

La libertà dei media in Italia ha subito un deterioramento continuo negli ultimi anni, sottoposta ad attacchi e violazioni senza precedenti della libertà di stampa e dei media, violazioni spesso avviate da funzionari pubblici nel tentativo di emarginare e mettere a tacere le voci critiche. L’interferenza politica nei media pubblici e l’uso sistematico di intimidazioni legali contro i giornalisti, da parte degli attori politici, hanno tradizionalmente caratterizzato la relazione tra media e politica in Italia. Tuttavia, negli ultimi due anni queste dinamiche hanno raggiunto livelli allarmanti.

In vista delle elezioni europee del 2024, in un contesto in rapido deterioramento, le organizzazioni partner del Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) hanno condotto una missione urgente a Roma, il 16-17 maggio 2024. La missione di advocacy aveva l’obiettivo di avviare un confronto con i rappresentanti istituzionali e politici su tre questioni: l’interferenza politica nel servizio pubblico, le intimidazioni legali di cui sono bersaglio i giornalisti e la potenziale acquisizione dell’AGI, una delle principali agenzie di stampa del Paese.

Questo rapporto riflette i risultati degli incontri tenutisi durante la missione e del continuo monitoraggio del consorzio, offrendo un’analisi esaustiva delle tre criticità identificate dalla delegazione. Valuta l’impatto di diverse misure e proposte di legge introdotte dai decisori italiani, alla luce delle più recenti disposizioni dell’UE volte a garantire l’indipendenza dei media pubblici, a contrastare la concentrazione del mercato, ad affrontare i conflitti di interesse e dotare la magistratura degli strumenti per contrastare le azioni vessatorie. Il rapporto include inoltre raccomandazioni dettagliate per gli attori istituzionali e governativi italiani, delineando i passi necessari per contrastare il declino della libertà dei media e attuare le riforme necessarie.

Il report è disponibile in inglese e italiano. 

Scarica il rapporto qui
MFRR 3 consortium logos
Library

Italy: Salvini’s video reignites debate over RAI independence

Italy: Salvini’s video reignites debate over RAI independence

The Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) backs concerns expressed over the editorial independence of Italian public broadcaster RAI. The MFRR further insists that the appointment process of the new leadership must guarantee RAI’s political independence and enforce the highest standards of journalism.

On 14 September, Rainews24, the news channel of Italy’s public broadcaster RAI, aired an almost four-minute monologue by deputy PM Matteo Salvini of the Lega Party. In the video he defends his actions, as former Minister of Interior, ahead of a court case where he is accused of kidnapping and neglect of duty for his decision to stop the docking of the Open Arms rescue vessel in 2019.

The editorial board of Rainews24 condemned the video broadcast, lamenting yet another case of leading members of the government using the channel as a “megaphone” for their statements. In a separate recent incident which sparked outcry, Gennaro Sangiuliano, Italy’s former Minister of Culture, used a prime-time news RAI segment to publicly handle personal matters, feeding into this concern. 

The journalists warned that Salvini’s video, taken directly from his social media, was broadcast unchallenged and without analysis or counterpoints, and as such fell short of the basic principles of journalism. Lega MPs on the RAI Oversight Parliamentary Committee defended the broadcast, claiming it was a relevant news item, and accused the dissenting journalists of political bias. 

This latest incident highlights long-documented concerns over political influence on RAI, just as the Parliament starts to debate the appointment of RAI’s new Board of Directors. The Board is composed of seven members, of which four are nominated by the two houses of Parliament, two by the Ministry of Economy, including the CEO, and one is elected by RAI employees. The parliamentary nominations and the President of the Board have to be approved by the Rai Oversight Committee, which requires a two-thirds majority and therefore the support of other political groupings outside those of the current government coalition. 

There have been calls to reform the appointment process to reduce the level of political influence over the RAI board, in line with the recent European Media Freedom Act, and opposition parties are calling for the reform to take place before the new board is appointed. The outcome of this debate and the selection process will be a crucial test of whether the public broadcaster will remain free from political capture.

MFRR urges the RAI Oversight Parliamentary Committee to ensure that all those appointed are free of political partisanship, they are committed to upholding the principles of journalistic integrity, and to the safeguarding of RAI’s editorial independence.

Signed by:

  • International Press Institute (IPI)
  • OBC Transeuropa (OBCT)
  • The European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
  • The European Federation of Journalists (EFJ)
  • Free Press Unlimited (FPU)

This statement was coordinated by the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR), a Europe-wide mechanism which tracks, monitors and responds to violations of press and media freedom in EU Member States, Candidate Countries and Ukraine.

MFRR 3 consortium logos