Security Decree: PA's obligation to cooperate with the Secret Services is dropped

The Council of Ministers approved the Security Decree-Lawby transforming the previous bill (Ddl) into an emergency measure. A strategic and political choicewhich also introduces significant changes to the original text, including the elimination of the obligation for public administrations and universities to cooperate with the Secret Service.

This is a major change from what was originally planned. In our article of 19 March, 'More powers to the Secret Service - the new face of national security', avevamo evidenziato come il Ddl rappresentasse un passo in avanti verso un modello di sicurezza nazionale più moderno, integrato e pronto ad affrontare le nuove minacce ibride, cyber e asimmetriche. Tra i punti qualificanti di quella proposta, figurava proprio l’obbligo per le amministrazioni pubbliche di actively cooperate with Italian intelligenceguaranteeing access to data, information and systems, according to the times and modalities established in coordination with the authority delegated to the services.

With the approval of the decree law, this obligation was removedand with it, one of the most important structural reforms of the system disappeared. Article 31, which provided for mandatory collaboration between public bodies and intelligence, has been thoroughly revised: cooperation will remain optional and must in any case take place in compliance with privacy rules. A significant change, the result of the observations raised by the Quirinale and the State Accounting Department, which led to a more prudent rewrite of the text, stripped of the points considered most controversial from a constitutional point of view.

The impact of choice: missed opportunity or protection of freedoms?

Depriving the Secret Service of a systemic and compulsory collaboration with PAs and universities represents, according to several analysts, a step backwards in the construction of a modern, efficient and integrated intelligence. In a global context marked by geopolitical instability, digital threats, subterranean radicalisation and hybrid wars, the country-system needs a shared and timely information networkin which the civil sectors are active participants.

The original draft aimed precisely at this: to build a transversal national security networkcapable of overcoming the traditional separations between apparatuses. Instead, the elimination of the obligation leaves a regulatory vacuum, risking keeping alive the operational 'grey zones' that slow down prevention activities.

On the other hand, the rationale behind the change is not without logic. The obligation to cooperate could have conflict with fundamental principles such as the protection of personal data, the autonomy of university and administrative bodiesand the principle of proportionality between state powers and civil liberties. It was feared that an overly binding rule could open the way to invasive drifts.

What is left standing

Despite the downsizing of Article 31, one of its most sensitive provisions remains in force: the enhancement of undercover activities. The decree in fact authorises undercover secret service agents to directly lead and direct associations, including subversive or terrorist associationsexpanding the reach of intelligence in extreme scenarios. While this provision allows for more incisive manoeuvres, it also raises inevitable questions about the democratic control of covered operations and on the limits of operational deception.

The other changes: what changes (and what doesn't)

The decree immediately six corrections on the instructions of the Quirinaleall considered at risk of unconstitutionality but overall of limited scopesuch that the original layout is not distorted.

• Secret services - Among the most significant changes is the abolition of the obligation for universities and public administrations to share sensitive information with intelligence: a central point in Article 31 of the bill, now transformed into a cooperation on a voluntary basissubject, however, to privacy regulations. On the other hand, another sensitive provision is not touched upon: the one that expands the operational powers of undercover agentsauthorising them, in the most extreme cases, to take command of subversive or terrorist organisationsas part of covert operations.
• Prison for mother prisoners - The possibility of imprisonment also remains for sentenced persons who are pregnant or have children under one year. The only change introduced concerns pre-trial detention, which will have to be carried out compulsorily in attenuated custody institutions.
• SIM to migrants - The ban on buying phone SIM cards for irregular migrants is lifted: it will not be necessary to present a residence permit, but an identity document will suffice.
• Riots in detention centres - The new offence has been scaled down: it will only apply to acts against order and security, but severe penalties remain up to twenty yearsif the revolt also results in unintentionallyinjury or death.
• Protests against large-scale works - The aggravating circumstance remains but is reworded: it now concerns infrastructure of public utility, affecting however demonstrations such as those against the Strait Bridge or the Tav.
• Resistance to a public official - Removed the rule prohibiting judges from applying mitigating factors, thus restoring a margin of discretion even when the offence is committed against a member of the police force.

The political reasons behind the turnaround

The transformation of the bill into a decree law is the result of a precise political strategy, aimed at speed up the approval of the security package and avoid the return of the text to the House for a third reading.

The President of the Council Giorgia Meloni openly claimed during the government session the choice of pass the parliamentary routepointing out that the measure has been blocked for more than a year. "It is a choice for which we take responsibility in the knowledge that we could wait no longer and that it was a priority to give answers to citizens and to ensure that our men and women in uniform receive the protection they deserve.

The Prime Minister also responded to critics who called the passage of the decree a 'short cut' or even a 'blitz'I think that it is neither, but simply a choice that the government legitimately decided to make, in order to fulfil its commitments to the citizens and to those who are called upon every day to defend our security'..

Administrative autonomy and shared security

The change on the point concerning the Secret Service reopens a central issue: what should be the relationship between public bodies and intelligence today? In many advanced democracies, universities and public administrations are already subject to structured cooperationbecause national security is conceived as a shared responsibilityinvolving the entire state apparatus.

In the hyper-connected and vulnerable world we live in, the threat can emerge from any areaand every entity, even the most peripheral, can represent a strategic sentinel or weak point in the network. Giving up institutionalising this collaboration risks becoming a missed opportunity to make Italian intelligence more modern, integrated and capable of preventing new forms of attack in real time.

Conclusion

The elimination of the obligation to cooperate between the PA and the Secret Service is undoubtedly the most significant novelty of the new Security Decree. A key regulation is set aside, while undercover activities are strengthened. A political compromise that reflects a fragile balance between operational needs and constitutional guarantees.

It now remains to be seen whether this waiver will be temporary or permanent. What is certain is that the security of the nation can no longer afford delays or operational divisions. In an era of multidimensional challenges, we need clear regulatory instruments, institutional integration and a common strategy.

We will continue to follow developments in the knowledge that security - like freedom - must be defended every day, even in the details of laws.