The Sixth Criminal Section of the Supreme Court has ruled again on the seizure of IT devices, reiterating the centrality of the principle of proportionality, defined as a true “standard of legitimacy for interference that infringes fundamental rights.”
With judgment no. 38331 of November 26, 2025, the Supreme Court has taken a stand against investigative practices characterized by indiscriminate collection of digital data.
The invasive nature of IT seizure
According to the Supreme Court, the seizure of IT devices is a particularly invasive measure in terms of private life, since access to digital media not only allows information relating to the facts under investigation to be acquired, but also enables an extremely broad picture of the suspect’s private life to be reconstructed, affecting his habits, relationships, movements, personal inclinations, and ideas.
The Public Prosecutor’s duty to motivate the seizure order
Due to this impact, the Court clarifies that the proportionality of the measure must be verifiable from the outset. It consequently follows that the Public Prosecutor, in the seizure order, is required to specify:
- the reasons justifying an extensive and comprehensive seizure, or the specific information being sought;
- the criteria for selecting the IT material;
- the reasonable time frame within which the selection will be made, with the subsequent return of the digital copy of the irrelevant data.
The prohibition of generic reasons
The Court expressly censures those decisions that merely refer to:
- the impossibility of using search keys,
- the complexity of the specific case,
- the need for an in-depth analysis of the relationships between the suspects.
Such arguments, if not adequately specified, would constitute a stratagem abstractly suited to justify any indiscriminate seizure of electronic data.
Edited by the Criminal Law Team