Parliament is hindering investigators in the Delmastro case
The Chamber rejects the chats—at the same time, Forza Italia halts the planned expansion of wiretapping measures
Rome – The government is coming under pressure amid the dispute over judicial policy. A committee of the Chamber of Deputies has rejected the Rome Public Prosecutor’s Office’s request to seize the chat messages of former Undersecretary of Justice Andrea Delmastro. Investigators wanted to analyze the messages the Fratelli d’Italia politician had exchanged with a restaurant owner. The final decision will now be made by the full chamber at the end of July.
The background to this is a case against the restaurant owner, whom investigators believe to be a suspected front man for a Camorra clan. The case involves allegations of fictitious asset transfers and money laundering with mafia-related aggravating circumstances, in connection with a Roman restaurant. Delmastro had acquired a stake in the restaurant and later sold his shares for cash; he himself is not considered a defendant in the case. Nevertheless, investigators consider the controversial chats to be crucial. The opposition accused the majority of obstructing the investigation and protested vociferously in Parliament.
At the same time, the coalition is divided over a second judicial issue. Fratelli d’Italia wanted to expand the admissibility of wiretap evidence to certain predicate offenses, citing proposals from anti-Mafia investigators. Forza Italia, however, put the amendment on hold. The party’s Senate caucus leader stated that they would not support the measure and warned against a form of dragnet surveillance that would violate the principle of proportionality.
Delmastro is one of Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni’s closest confidants and resigned from his post as undersecretary in the spring. He had previously been at the center of a legal dispute: In a case involving the disclosure of official information regarding the imprisoned anarchist Alfredo Cospito, a conviction was upheld on appeal, a ruling he intends to challenge before the Court of Cassation. The dual dispute over chats and wiretapping rules illustrates just how much judicial policy is currently preoccupying the ruling parties.
