Yet another Italian excellence has been tarnished by a request for judicial administration. The request made by the Milan Prosecutor’s Office against the fashion company Tod’s was, in fact, rejected by both the Milan Court and the Court of Appeal. However, the Prosecutor has sought the opinion of the Court of Cassation, which will issue its ruling next month.
According to the Prosecutor’s Office, Tod’s allegedly failed to adequately monitor its production chain, particularly with regard to Chinese subcontractors where cases of labor exploitation and various irregularities were reportedly found. This is not the first instance of such allegations, as it follows similar cases involving companies belonging to the Dior, Armani, Alviero Martini, Valentino, and Loro Piana groups.
Without delving into the merits of a case that is still ongoing, at least two key takeaways emerge. Writing in 24+, Professor Vincenzo Morgillo, Full Professor of Criminal Law at UnitelmaSapienza, notes that supply chains can conceal human rights violations and criminal illegalities. For this reason, the European Parliament’s attention has led to the recent EU Directive 2024/1760 on Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence (CSDDD). This Directive obliges companies to rethink and monitor their entire supply chain, establishing legal obligations for businesses regarding sustainability due diligence, and promoting responsible business practices as well as the protection of human rights and the environment.
However, as Professor Morgillo points out, “the application of highly invasive measures based merely on clues, assumptions of ‘environmental proximity,’ or supposed facilitation risks generating—not prevention, which still needs to be demonstrated if we are not to succumb to the illusion of the ‘judicial hand’—but rather a form of preventive stigmatization that can also affect healthy companies, with reputational and financial effects that are difficult to reverse.”
It is understandable, from this perspective, the reaction of Tod’s president, Diego Della Valle, who promptly declared: “Made in Italy is one of the excellences of our country, recognized all over the world […] and such trivialities should not be told lightly, as if we were truly criminals, without the opportunity for a proper rebuttal. It causes enormous damage to the country, to craftsmanship, and to young people seeking work. This lack of respect for our reputation is a disgrace.”
Drawing on the saying “The US innovates, Europe regulates,” the difference in approach is clear: in the United States, there is a culture more oriented toward experimentation, risk, and entrepreneurial freedom, whereas in Europe, a more regulatory and precautionary approach prevails, with greater emphasis on rights, safety, and sustainability. This is not necessarily negative—indeed, Europe has always been a global beacon for rights—but there is a lingering concern that the implementation of the Directive may cause quite a few headaches for Italian companies.
If you need consulting on this matter, contact us at info@kriptia.com and we will provide full support, or complete our free supplier assessment by clicking here.