python said:you are incorrect and again ignorant of the facts in the case. you are also guilty of the same hubris velofidelis is - not reading/ignoring/being blind to what was delivered to you and digested specifically for you in an effort to help you to understand the case.
fact #1: the 1959 Convention on Mutual Assistance on Criminal Matters was carefully examined by cas (please bother yourself to read it). it was determined beyond a shadow of any doubt that coni acted strictly in accordance with the 1959 convention. again and again, read the legal analysis.
fact #2: if the constraints were set by the spanish law, the expert crew from italy would never be explicitly approved by the two, read again two, two, two spanish, spanish, spanish bodies to take the samples.
sometimes it pays to be open minded, particularly about the stuff that was spoon fed to you several times before.
In the words of the great poet from the early 80's - 'No one is blinder than he who will not see' (I think he may have borrowed it from someone else).