Monday will be discussed in the lobby of the Senate bill on wiretapping that the absurdity of some of his points and the consternation that never leaves hoped that we would come this far.
Beyond the sea of \u200b\u200bwords is clear that when it decreed heavy penalties for those who have the duty to inform and limit the tools of someone who has the duty to act, the intention to defend the privacy really lose all credibility.
There are many points in fact very perplexing the maximum duration of 75 days for the interception, his authorization no longer by the investigating judge but by a tribunal of three judges to whom the judge must give serious indications of guilt.
That is the purpose must be provided before the instrument to achieve it.
are introduced and penalties that include imprisonment up to two months or four to twenty thousand euro fine for anyone to publish for summary pleadings before the conclusion of the preliminary investigation that can last for years. The same rule also applies to acts of a secret investigation but not disclosed.
also heavy penalties for publishers who face up to 464,000 € for the same reason.
Although this bill is proposed as a brake to the possible danger of degeneration information and privacy you read between the lines it turns out that not only as a pretext hazards, just and reasonable in some cases already well established for years in others, but is not limited either to remain in that area as it also covers anyone who "fraudulently take photographs or recordings of conversations and communications addressed to him," which "shall be punished with imprisonment from six months to four years" This
point leaves a really big because it punishes a priori interpretation the only act without considering the motivations and context. The term fraudulent
it always gives a negative value even if such could happen to secretly record someone who threatens us. D'Addario
The case for the weakness of the charges made, after an 'initial stage of outrage, has become for many an act over that provided the pretext for introducing this new rule abhorrent.
But when you think you have hit rock bottom you find that there are always those who continue to dig.
This bill also defines the interception in fact a kind of immunity when it is specified that if one listens even indirectly, will still be an honorable mandatory approval of the Executive Committee of the House or Senate. Needless to mention
sources also because things are constantly updated and in recent weeks have made some changes that slightly changes the meaning of the whole law.
serious indications of guilt I have in fact become serious evidence of a crime and are admitted shooting and records "fraudulent" if made for the purposes of news from professional journalists on professional members.
small consolation when you consider that a citizen may not register any such conversations in his blackmailer.
Also what is a much more serious changes in recent days that would exclude from the arrest in fragrance for the crimes of child abuse in cases of lesser gravity.
But you could make thousands of examples of how the law defines a strong appreciation of the interception and then the investigations.
Just think that you can not make use of wiretaps for criminal punishment of less than five years.
At a time when the world information and communication is in great turmoil, when increasingly there are those who try to unmark edittatoriali lines and rhetorical maneuvers that come close in advance the minimum starting point for discussion.
sure what to publish and what to intercept it means control over the justice and information, but we often hear that after all this law will change nothing.
So why and for whom was it made?
0 comments:
Post a Comment