The Elena Ferrante Case: Between the Right to Anonymity and Privacy.

“I don’t hate lies at all; in fact, I find them beneficial in life and resort to them when necessary to protect myself.” 

This is what the famous and mysterious Elena Ferrante writes in her autobiographical work titled *La Frantumaglia*; it seems that her identity has now been revealed. 

According to a recent investigation by *Il Sole 24 Ore*, the author of the best-selling books is Anita Raja, a translator born in Naples and living in Rome, whose mother was a Polish Jew who survived the Holocaust. The mystery surrounding Elena Ferrante’s true identity would thus have been solved, fulfilling the (legitimate?) desire of millions of readers who for years have wanted to know the name and identity of the person behind the famous pseudonym.

The first question is whether the investigation violated the right to a pseudonym. In fact, just like a name, a pseudonym can be used as a means of concealing one’s true identity and thus as an expression of the right to privacy. 

According to the Civil Code, a pseudonym is a name other than the one assigned by law; however, it may be protected in the same way as the right to a name provided that it has acquired the same significance as a name, or serves the same function of social identification. If this condition is met (consider, for example, the pseudonyms of writers, or actors who use stage names that are virtually better known than their real names) the person using it may bring an injunction against unauthorized use, asking the court to order the cessation of the unlawful use of the pseudonym, without prejudice to the right to compensation for damages.

But that does not appear to be the case. In fact, rather than appropriating the famous writer’s pseudonym, the investigative report by *Il Sole 24 Ore* seems to have violated her right to anonymity. 

However, there is no general right to anonymity under Italian law.  

Could Elena Ferrante—who has always said she does not want her true identity to be revealed—ever invoke a more general violation of privacy? A right that, as is well known, is increasingly denied to public figures.

Before the Privacy Act came into effect, the basis for the so-called “right to be left alone” was a 1975 ruling by the Court of Cassation, which defined this right as the protection of strictly personal and family matters and events which, even if occurring outside the home, do not present a socially significant interest to third parties against interference that, even if carried out by lawful means, for purposes not exclusively speculative and without offense to honor, reputation, or dignity, are not justified by overriding public interests. 

Over time, case law had established that anyone who chose public prominence as an essential aspect of their actions was deemed to have waived that portion of their right to privacy directly related to their public persona.

The dividing line between the right to privacy and the public’s right to know thus seemed to be the individual’s popularity. However, even highly popular individuals retain that right, provided the facts in question have nothing to do with the reasons for their popularity.

The relationship between the right to report news and privacy is highly complex and is governed by a set of rules that have evolved over time, all of which have sought to strike a fair balance between the various interests at stake.

There are regulations designed to protect citizens' privacy that journalists must adhere to while performing their duties.

Law No. 675 of 1996 on the protection of personal data, which was subsequently incorporated into the “Personal Data Protection Code” (Legislative Decree No. 196 of June 30, 2003), established a comprehensive system for balancing conflicting rights through the provision of a variety of legal mechanisms: criteria for balancing, procedures for implementing it, and judicial tools.

The current regulatory framework provides for a guarantee mechanism that varies depending on the nature of the data.

To recap briefly, personal data may be used provided that three conditions are met:

- The use must take place in the course of an activity related to freedom of expression;
- The personal data must relate to matters of public interest;
- The disclosure must be limited to “what is strictly necessary,” meaning it must not go beyond the informational purpose by including information that is not strictly necessary.

The investigation into Elena Ferrante’s true identity has not yet been clearly confirmed or denied. Whether she is indeed Anita Raja therefore remains a mystery.