Accusing another participant of acting in bad faith during a group conversation does not automatically amount to the criminal offence of defamation. The distinction between insult and defamation — and the role played by the right to criticism — completely changes the framework of liability.
According to the settled case law of the Italian Supreme Court, where the person targeted by the offensive statement is present in the conversation and is able to read the message directly, the matter does not fall within defamation but rather, at most, within insult aggravated by the presence of several persons.
This point is significant because, following the decriminalisation introduced by Legislative Decree 7/2016, insult no longer constitutes a criminal offence; it remains a civil tort that may nonetheless give rise to a claim for damages.
The limit of the right to criticism
A further step, however, is needed: not everything said in a chat can be justified as the exercise of the right to criticism. Attributing bad-faith conduct to someone is not the same as expressing a mere opinion — it amounts to a specific assertion about a person's behaviour, which ought to be supported by concrete evidence.
The case law of the Italian Supreme Court has made clear that the right to criticism finds its limit in respect for moderation and the truth of the facts: once that boundary is crossed and the statement turns into personal invective or a gratuitous accusation, the expression may become harmful to honour and reputation.
In short, where a factual basis is lacking and the statement amounts to a personal attack, the way is opened to civil liability, which may be significant, with potential consequences in terms of damages.