The interception of communication in France and Italy – what relevance for the development of English law?^†

† The article has been drafted in June 2015 and further updates and reform under proposal or negotiation have been only tangentially mentioned in footnote where relevant.

Figures & data

Table 1. Judicial and administrative interceptions: comparison of powers

	Authority	Grounds	Duration	Renewals
Administrative interceptions	Prime minister (article 3 Law 646/91)	(i) Prevention of terrorism and organised crime (ii) National security (iii) Economic protection (iv) Outlawed groups	4 months	No limits
Judicial interceptions	Juge d’instruction (article 100 CPP)	Crimes and délits (max penalty >2 years)	4 months	No limits
	Juge d’instruction (article 80(4) CPP)	Suspicious deaths or disappearances	2 months	No limits
	Public prosecutor under the authority of the JLD (arts 74(2), 695(36) and 696(21) CPP)	Hunting of an absconding individual	2 months	Renewable three times for délits; no limits for crimes
	Public prosecutor under the authority of the JLD (article 706(95) CPP)	Organised crime	15 days	Once renewable

Source: CNCIS, ‘14e Rapport d’Activité 2005’ (Report) (2006): 18, 54.