Coercive measures: federal judge drives "Fundamental lawyer"



Mandatory measures: a federal judge wants to hear both sides. He advocates a system change. | pxhere
Mandatory measures: a federal judge wants to hear both sides. He advocates a system change. | pxhere

Monitor phone, bury or spy program: for federal judge Niklaus Oberholzer, the judicial control of secret coercive measures is "rather a fig leaf".

Judges do not listen to secret enforcement measures on both sides, such as telephone monitoring or the use of computer trojans, but only the prosecutors. However, the accused can not say anything about it, precisely because the measures are secret. This says federal judge Niklaus Oberholzer to Radio SRF. Court control is more of a fig leaf.

Before the court of first instance, Oberholzer, not only the public prosecutor should say something. The former president of the St. Galler prosecution chamber proposes to call in a "fundamental rights lawyer" without the knowledge of the suspect. This must guarantee the fundamental rights – such as personal freedom – of the suspect.

Do the jurors pass on the applications?

According to research by SRF, judges last year approved 97 percent of requests for secret surveillance of suspects (more about the individual cantons here). For Professor Urs Saxer, this number is "most amazing". "People almost have the impression that the courts are running through all applications," Saxer told SRF. There is a great need for explanation. The impression that the jury simply beckons all applications is rejected by Jürg Zinglé. Investigate with each measure whether the legal requirements have been met and whether these are justified, according to the chairman of the Bernese law on SRF. And because of the high costs, prosecutors are also cautious about such monitoring.


Source link

Leave a Reply