Your cookie preferences

EDPB guidance · Art. 7 GDPR

We use technical cookies essential for the platform to work (login, security, sessions). We would also like to use analytics cookies to understand how to improve it.

You can accept all, reject all, or choose which categories to switch on.Your consent is valid for 6 months and you can withdraw it at any time from the footer.

You will find everything in our privacy notice.

All news
Enforcement July 8, 2026 3 min

Italy's DPA fines AgID: EUR 55,000 to the Agency for Digital Italy over transparency and privacy by design

Decision no. 419 of 28 May 2026: when the body steering the State's digitalisation gets it wrong, the message to the whole public sector is unmistakable

TL;DR for the DPO

Decision no. 419/2026: EUR 55,000 fine to AgID for breaching Arts. 5(1)(a)(b) and 5(2), 12, 14 and 25 GDPR, with publication of the order on the DPA's website. In short: lawfulness and purpose limitation, information to people whose data was NOT collected directly (Art. 14), and privacy by design. If it happens to the agency writing the technical rules of digital government, no public body can feel safe.

The three points that matter

  • Art. 14 is the great forgotten duty: when data comes from other sources (databases, other bodies, vendors) the notice is due anyway, within precise timeframes. It is the typical breach of projects that 'reuse' available data.
  • Privacy by design (Art. 25) enforced against a public body: compliance must be designed before launching platforms and services, not patched afterwards. Twice as true for public digital projects.
  • The public sanction weighs more than the EUR 55,000: publishing the order on the DPA's website is an accessory reputational sanction hitting institutional credibility.

What to do now, in practice

If you advise public bodies or their vendors: 1) for every project reusing data from other sources, check the Art. 14 notice exists and was given in time; 2) require the privacy assessment BEFORE launch (documented by design, not declared); 3) use this case in public-sector training: it is the perfect answer to 'we are a public body, it will not happen to us'.

Why it matters for your clients

The value of the case is both symbolic and practical: the authority applies the same rules to everyone, including the body coordinating the State's digital transformation. For a DPO working with the public sector it is leverage to obtain what is often postponed: complete notices on reused databases and design assessments actually done before go-live. The full text of the order on the DPA's website clarifies the specific context of the processing at issue.

Official source:Italian Data Protection Authority - injunction order no. 419 of 28 May 2026 (AgID)

Looking for a workspace for your DPO work?

DPO Workspace is built by a certified DPO. 30-day free trial.

Start free

Related articles

Enforcement
€16,7Mfor telemarketing and contracts activated without consent

Italian DPA fines Wind Tre €16.7 million: telemarketing despite objections and contracts activated without customers' knowledge

People who had objected kept receiving calls, and some contracts were activated without the person knowing. The Garante fines Wind Tre €16.7 million and restates a principle for every company with an agency network: responsibility is not outsourced along with sales.

Oct 12, 2026New 5 min
Enforcement
€350kto controller and processor over outdated systems

Greece: €350,000 for a data breach — both the Ministry and the processor running outdated systems fined, and there was no Article 28 contract

An attack on the systems of the agency running a Ministry's programmes exposed identification, financial and health data of a very large number of people. The Hellenic DPA fines the controller €200,000 and the processor €150,000: notifying well is not enough if the supplier works on outdated systems and the relationship is not governed by a contract.

Oct 08, 2026New 5 min
Enforcement
€4kfor a camera pointed at a home

Italian DPA fines the municipality of Arvier €4,000: a camera filmed a resident's windows and balconies, and the masking came too late

A small municipality in the Aosta Valley uses cameras for traffic, parking, number plates, the environment and civil protection. A resident finds that one covers her home. The Garante imposes a fine and makes a point that applies to every system: masking private areas is designed before the camera is switched on, not after the complaint.

Oct 08, 2026New 5 min