The Severino Law, enacted in November 2012, aims to combat corruption in Italian public administration by establishing a robust framework for transparency and accountability. It empowers the National Anti-Corruption Authority (ANAC) to oversee compliance with anti-corruption measures and enforce transparency obligations, while also instituting disqualification and incompatibility provisions for public officials convicted of crimes. The law has faced constitutional challenges and discussions regarding its implications on political rights, particularly concerning the presumed innocence of individuals with non-definitive convictions.

1. THE SEVERINO LAW
WHAT IT SETS OUT, ACTUAL
CASES, OPEN QUESTIONS
March 2022

2. THE LAW
Law 6 November 2012,
n. 190 – Measures to prevent
and repress corruption
and illegality in the Public
Administration, the so-called
Severino Law (named after
at-the-time Minister of Justice
Paola Severino) introduces
a comprehensive regime to
fight corruption and foster
transparency in the Italian
Public Administration (PA).
The Law was passed with
a confidence vote by the
government after a legislative
procedure lasting two years.
Three legislative decrees
were adopted (n. 235/2012,
n. 33/2013 and n. 39/2013)
and decree n. 62/2013 of
the President of the Republic,
following the delegation
present in the Law.

3. WHY MAKE
AN ANTI-CORRUPTION LAW
The Draft Bill was submitted in 2010
by former Minister of Justice Angelino Alfano
(IV Berlusconi Government).
The need to address political and legislative
corruption in Italy arose after Italy ratified
the UN Convention Against Corruption with
Law n. 116/2009.
Moreover, in 2011 of all the OECD countries,
Italy was ranked at the bottom of the
Corruption Perception Index by Transparency
International.

4. THE NATIONAL ANTI-CORRUPTION AUTHORITY
The Severino Law gives Italy’s
National Anti-corruption Authority
(ANAC) some important functions
in terms of transparency and
corruption prevention in Italian PA:
› it adopts the National
Anti-Corruption Plan proposed
by the Department of PA providing
guidelines for public administrations,
which must then prepare their own
three-year plans to prevent corruption.
The last one was approved by
the ANAC Council with resolution
n. 1064 of 13 November 2019;
› it provides its opinion on many
of the measures of the Minister
of PA regarding the conduct of
public officials;
› it oversees and checks to
make sure the anti-corruption
measures adopted by the public
administrations are being applied
and how effective they are.

5. THE NATIONAL ANTI-CORRUPTION AUTHORITY/2
Each year the ANAC prepares a
Report for the Parliament on what
is being done to fight corruption
and illegality and submits it by
31 December.
This Report also includes
information on ANAC’s supervision
of public contracts and points out
any critical issues.
Moreover:
› It can ask public administrations
for information, documents and
so on and order the adoption of
acts or measures to implement
the National Anti-corruption Plan
and/or eliminate non-compliant
conduct or acts.
› It defines criteria on the rotation
of public managers in sectors
that are particularly susceptible
to corruption.

6. THE ANAC IN IMPLEMENTING
LEGISLATIVE DECREES
Legislative Decree n. 39/2013
on the inconferability and
incompatibility of public offices
gives the ANAC supervisory power.
In particular, the ANAC oversees
compliance with the Decree’s
provisions and receives reports
of possible infringements.
Legislative decree n. 33/2013
on the right to public access and
obligations regarding information
disclosure, transparency and
dissemination by public
administrations tasks the ANAC with:
› checking accurate compliance
with the disclosure obligations
and the work of those in charge
of transparency;
› adopting operational guidelines
on public access;
› imposing the sanctions for
non-compliance with transparency
obligations.

7. THE DEPARTMENT OF
PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
It was established to perform various
functions, including preparing the National
Anti-Corruption Plan, which is approved by
the ANAC. It also:
› coordinates the implementation of
strategies to prevent and fight corruption
and illegality in the public administration;
› promotes and defines shared regulations
and methods to prevent corruption;
› receives the Corruption Prevention Plans
from the various public administrations.

8. TRANSPARENCY OBLIGATIONS
IN THE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Transparency is a fundamental
principle of the Severino Law and is
ensured by disclosing information
on administrative procedures,
budgets, financial statements and
costs to carry out public works and
provide public services on public
administrations’ institutional websites
in a way that is easy to access and
consult.
Special attention is given to
the disclosure obligations of
contractors involved in tendering
procedures for works, services
and supplies.
For example, the following must be
disclosed: the proponent structure,
the subject matter of the invitation
to tender, the list of operators
invited to submit bids, the winning
bidder, the amount of the bid, the
time required to complete the work
and the amounts paid.

9. TRANSPARENCY OBLIGATIONS
OF LEGISLATIVE DECREE N. 33/2013
After defining the general principle of
transparency, disclosure and the right
to knowability, the Decree defines:
› the disclosure obligations regarding
the use of public resources and
information on elected political officials
or anyone who exercises political power
at the state, regional or local;
› the types of information public
administrations must disclose;
› who is to be held accountable for
non-compliance, delayed compliance
or inaccurate compliance with the
disclosure obligations.

10. INCOMPATIBILITY OF OFFICES
IN THE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
The Severino Law and Legislative
Decree 39/2013 modified the
Public Employment Law (Legislative
Decree n. 165/2001) regarding
office incompatibility in public
administrations to prevent
interference and mixing between
politics and administration and
possible conflicts of interest. It
specifically sets forth the cases of:
› inconferability, which bars,
either permanently or temporarily,
people convicted of crimes against
the PA or those who have been
members of national, regional and
local political bodies from having any
appointment in the PA. This also applies
to the management of Local Health
Authorities;
› incompatibility, which sets out the
obligation for potential officerholders
to choose which office to keep if they
already hold another incompatible
public office.
The Law also refers to other legislation
on conflict of interest for the offices
of Prime Minister, Minister, Vice
Minister, Undersecretary and Special
Government Commissioner.

11. INCANDITABILITY
Legislative Decree. 235/2012 on
incanditability and disqualification
from holding elected and
government office after receiving
a definitive conviction for
crimes without criminal intent,
implementing the Severino Law and
identifying cases of incanditability
for Parliament or for National,
Regional or Local Government.
Anyone who has received a
definitive sentence of more than
two years of imprisonment for
crimes, either perpetrated or
attempted, without prejudice to the
provisions of the Italian criminal
code permanently banning from
public office anyone convicted of:
› Mafia crimes, terrorism, drug
trafficking,
› crimes against the PA cannot
become a candidate.
The Decree also regulates cases
of unforeseen incanditability as
well as specific cases provided for
in Regional and Local elections.

12. WHISTLEBLOWING
The Severino Law introduces protections
for whistle-blowers, i.e. public employees
who report potential crimes. Specifically,
anyone who reports an alleged crime
against the public administration cannot:
› be punished;
› be demoted;
and their identity is not divulged.
Failure to provide these safeguards may
be reported to the Department of PA for
sanctioning and/or other measures.
The ANAC has adopted specific guidelines
on this.

13. LIST OF SUPPLIERS
According to the Severino Law, each
Prefecture must have a list of suppliers,
service providers and contractors who are
not subject to attempted Mafia infiltration
(a ‘white list’) to make anti-Mafia checks
more effective, especially in sectors
considered to be more at risk (e.g. the waste
disposal sector). Being on this list means
there is nothing preventing participation in
public tendering procedures for purchasing
or to award public contracts.
Law Decree n. 90/2014 made it mandatory
for companies operating in sectors at risk for
Mafia infiltration to register on this white list.

14. STIFFER PENALTIES FOR CRIMES AGAINST
THE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
The Severino Law modified
some provisions of the Italian
Criminal Code on crimes
against the public administration
perpetrated by public officials and
raised penalties for crimes like
embezzlement, bribery, judicial
corruption and so on.
Inducing bribery became
a separate crime, i.e. ‘undue
inducement to give or promise
money or other benefits’.
The crime of illicit influence
peddling was also introduced
(art. 346-bis of the Italian
Criminal Code) for those who
by exploiting existing relations with
a public official […], unduly obtain or
promise, for themselves or for others,
money or other benefits as the price
of illicit mediating between a public
official […] or as compensation to
perform a task that goes against the
duties of their office or for the failed
or delayed performance of one of
their duties
“

15. Law n. 3/2019, or the ‘Wipe Out
Corruption’ Law, broadened
the scope of this crime and, by
amending art. 346-bis of the
Italian Criminal Code, deemed
it unlawful to exploit even only
asserted relations with a public
official. Ultimately, it is enough for a
mediator to merely claim that their
relationship with a public official is
such that they could influence their
behaviour, even if such relations are
only alleged to exist and not real.
THE ‘WIPE OUT CORRUPTION’ LAW

16. SENATOR BERLUSCONI AND HIS TAX
FRAUD CONVICTION
In August 2013, Italy’s Court of
Cassation upheld Senator Silvio
Berlusconi’s conviction of tax
fraud in the trial on his purchase
of broadcasting rights for his
media company Mediaset. He
was sentenced to four years of
imprisonment and a fine of 7
million euros.
In October of that same year, in
application of the Severino Law, the
Select Committee on Elections and
Parliamentary Immunity expelled
him from the Senate.
In the meantime, in September
Berlusconi appealed to the European
Court of Human Rights regarding
this application of the Severino Law
deemed retroactive. However, there
was never any ruling because the
Court accepted the withdrawal of his
application after he was rehabilitated
by the Milan Court three years after
atoning for his crimes by doing
community service.

17. THE PLEA OF THE COURT OF GENOA…
The Ordinary Court of Genoa raised
a plea as to the constitutionality of
Article 8 of the Legislative Decree
235/2012 in the context of the
proceedings brought by Regional
Councilman of the Liguria Region
who was suspended after receiving a
first-instance conviction for forgery
and embezzlement. The plaintiff
specifically disputed the fact that
he was suspended from office after
receiving a non-definitive criminal
conviction, in violation of arts. 117
and 122 of the Italian Constitution
as well as art. 3 of the European
Convention on Human Rights on
the protection of active and passive
voting rights.
What is more, the plaintiff argued
that the Severino Law was unlawful
because it had been passed without
being discussed at all in the State/
Regional Conference, even though it
influences the ‘ability of its top elective
bodies to remain in office’ (at the
Regional level).

18. … AND THE DECISION OF
THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT
In Decision n. 35/2021, the
Constitutional Court ruled that
it found nothing unlawful in the
provisions of the Legislative Decree,
both because it impacts a matter,
i.e. public order and security, which
is the exclusive competence of the
State, and because the sanctions
prevent
even the possibility that the elected
officeholder’s tenure in the elective
body could harm a protected public
interest
“

19. THE RUOTI CITY COUNCIL
In February 2022, the Prefect of Potenza,
a city in the southern Italian Region of
Basilicata, signed four measures ‘to ascertain
the suspending of rights’ of four minority
Council members in the Municipality of
Ruoti who were later suspended from office
in a court investigation into corruption,
defamation and stalking, in application of
the Severino Law.
The Council members were said to have
organised a systematic attempt to discredit
the incumbent City Government, and in
particular, the Mayor, to try to force her to
resign and hold early elections.

20. THE GUIDI CASE AND ILLICIT INFLUENCE PEDDLING
In March 2016, Gianluca Gemelli,
an entrepreneur and partner
of former Minister of Economic
Development Federica Guidi,
was accused of illicit influence
peddling because he was said
to have exploited his personal
relationship with Minister Guidi
to get an amendment to the 2015
Budget Law adding the Tempa
Rossa oil refinery to the list of
works for government approval
(specifically, the approval of the
Ministry of Economic Development),
removing it from the competence of
Local Administrations.
According to a wiretap, Gemelli
reassured one of the directors of
Total Oil by telling him the provision
would soon be passed.
The investigation was shelved
because Gemelli ‘beyond such
objectionable behaviour’ had not
requested compensation for
intervening with the Government
representatives.

21. THE JUSTICE REFERENDUM AND THE ABROGATION
OF LEGISLATIVE DECREE 235/2012
On June 3, 2021, the ‘Giustizia
Giusta’* submitted six referendum
questions to the Italian Court of
Cassation, including repealing
Legislative Decree n. 235/2012 on
incanditability and disqualification
from holding office in the public
administration. The Committee was
backed by the Radical Party and the
rightwing League. Other political
parties also collected signatures: the
centre-right Forza Italia, the New
Italian Socialist Party, the Union of
Christian Democrats and the Italian
Socialist Party.
One important stakeholder, the
Unione delle Camere Penali* stated
that it was in favour of abolishing the
Through its president Antonio Decaro,
the National Association of Italian
Municipalities (ANCI) stated that:
provisions of the Severino Law that impact
potential candidates’ ability to stand
for election in the event of only a non-
definitive conviction (…) to us this seems
to be irremediably in conflict with the
constitutional principle of the presumption
of innocence, and in any case, any intent to
repeal it deserves our support
“
Today we feel the need to reiterate again
how necessary it is to change the Severino
Law […] to give stability and continuity to the
administrative life of our community
“
ALL
IN
FAVOUR
ALL
IN
FAVOUR
* literally, the Just Justice Committee * The Union of Criminal Chambers

22. THE REFERENDUM ON JUSTICE
Democratic Party secretary Enrico
Letta stated:
However, some Democratic Party
representatives disagreed with Letta.
For example, MP Bruno Bossio stated
that she backed the referendums
I cannot help but express my clear
opposition to both pre-trial detention
and the Severino [Law, TN] […]
Improvements can be made but
without a complete overhaul
“
because they address the thorniest
issues in justice today
“
ALL
AGAINST
ALL
AGAINST
The rightwing party Brothers of
Italy invited its electors to vote no
on repealing the provisions of the
Severino Law. MP Delmastro
Delle Vedove stated:
On March 8, in ruling n. 56/2022,
the Constitutional Court
It puts our security at risk (…) the
judges have too much discretion,
they would be the ones to decide
case by case
“
declared the request for a popular
referendum to repeal decree 235 of
2012 admissible
“

23. ILLICIT PEDDLING VS LOBBYING
In the public debate, many have sounded the
alarm on the possible risk of criminalising
perfectly lawful lobbying activities by mistaking
them for crimes (influence peddling).
This intermingles with the lack of any overall rules
regarding representation of interests.
In fact, some of the provisions of the Severino Law
could be interpreted in such a way that could ban
any liaising with the public administration without
distinguishing between unlawfully exerting
pressure on legislators and the representation
of special interests, i.e. lobbying.

24. ILLICIT PEDDLING VS LOBBYING
IN THE “WIPE OUT CORRUPTION” LAW
What is more, some believe that the
so-called ‘Wipe Out Corruption’ Law
as it is currently formulated could
lead to the risk of overextending the
crime, because the act that is the
subject of the mediation is no longer
required to be against the official
duties of the public officeholder.
Regarding this, in July 2021, the Italian
Court of Cassation, in the ‘Mafia
Capitale’ investigation into organised
crime in Rome City Government,
and in particular on the ruling
acquitting former Rome Mayor
Gianni Alemanno from the charge
of corruption and a lesser charge
of influence peddling, raised some
doubts because the regulation on
illicit influence peddling does not
clearly state the punishable illicit
influence, especially because it is
impossible to compare it to lawful
lobbying, as this has yet to be
regulated.

25. Palazzo Doria Pamphilj
Via del Plebiscito 107
Roma 00186
T. +39 06 69940838
telos@telosaes.it
www.telosaes.it
facebook.com/Telosaes
twitter.com/Telosaes
youtube.com/telosaes
linkedin.com/company/telos-a&s
pinterest.com/telosaes/
instagram.com/telos_analisi_strategie/
slideshare.net/telosaes
TELOS ANALISI & STRATEGIE