ITALY Law and Practice Contributed by: Enrico Maria Mancuso, Federico Bracalente, Marco Accorroni and Marco Mariotti, Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer LLP
ies, including oversight of regulatory compliance and financial stability; • the FIU, responsible for receiving and analysing suspicious transaction reports; • the Agenzia delle Entrate , Italy’s revenue agency, responsible for tax assessment and collection; and • the Autorità Nazionale Anticorruzione (ANAC), Italy’s anti-corruption authority, vested with super - visory and regulatory powers over public procure - ment and the integrity of public administration. Parallel Criminal, Civil and Administrative Regimes Italy operates a parallel enforcement regime: a single financial offence may give rise simultaneously to crim - inal prosecution, administrative proceedings before CONSOB or the Banca d ’ Italia , tax proceedings before the Agenzia delle Entrate , and civil recovery actions. Co-ordination is ensured through: • mandatory reporting obligations (CONSOB, the Banca d ’ Italia , the FIU and the Agenzia delle Entrate must refer suspected criminal conduct to the Public Prosecutor’s office); • information-sharing protocols between the GdF and regulatory authorities; and • the enforcement of the ne bis in idem principle. 2.2 Initiation of Investigations Italian financial crime investigations may be initiated through multiple channels, including: • whistle-blower reports (protected under Legislative Decree No 24/2023); • victim complaints; • suspicious transaction reports filed with the FIU under AML obligations (see 3.3 Money Launder- ing ); • tax audit referrals by the Agenzia delle Entrate and GdF; • regulatory referrals by CONSOB, Banca d ’ Italia and ANAC; and • referrals or direct investigations by the European Public Prosecution Office for offences affecting EU financial interests. Public prosecutors are bound by the constitutional principle of mandatory prosecution and thus have no formal discretion to decline prosecution once suffi -
cient evidence of a criminal offence exists. In practice, however, due to resource constraints and priority cri - teria defined by each Public Prosecutor’s Office, not all reported matters result in active investigation 2.3 Investigatory Powers Documents and Information Requests The public prosecutor, judges and judicial police may issue requests for documents and information (RFIs). However, save for specific exceptions, there is no legal obligation to comply with RFIs. Non-compliance may nonetheless trigger a search and seizure and expose company directors to criminal liability for aiding and abetting. Searches and Seizures Searches may be ordered by the public prosecutor or, in cases of urgency, carried out by the judicial police on their own initiative. Searches may concern per - sons, premises, vehicles or computer systems. Sei - zure of relevant items may follow. Interviewing Suspects and Witnesses Witnesses may be summoned to give statements before the judicial police or the public prosecutor; only statements given in this formal context may be used in court. Suspects may be interviewed only in the pres - ence of defence counsel and cannot be compelled to self-incriminate. Information gathered without counsel in urgent on-scene circumstances cannot be used in proceedings. Tracing, Freezing and Confiscating Assets (including Digital and Crypto-Assets) Assets – including digital assets and crypto-assets – may be seized as instruments or proceeds of crime, or frozen preventively by a judge. Confiscation may be applied following a conviction, or without a con - viction in exceptional circumstances – such as where the suspect is linked to organised crime or mafia-type associations, and the assets are presumed to be of illicit origin due to a disproportion between the sus - pect’s declared income and their actual wealth (see
6.3 Proceeds of Crime Recovery ). 2.4 Use of Technology and Data
Italian authorities primarily use data analytics and AI to detect money laundering and tax fraud patterns,
108 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook