-
- Art. 5a FC
- Art. 6 FC
- Art. 10 FC
- Art. 16 FC
- Art. 17 FC
- Art. 20 FC
- Art. 22 FC
- Art. 29a FC
- Art. 30 FC
- Art. 32 FC
- Art. 42 FC
- Art. 43 FC
- Art. 43a FC
- Art. 55 FC
- Art. 56 FC
- Art. 60 FC
- Art. 68 FC
- Art. 75b FC
- Art. 77 FC
- Art. 96 para. 2 lit. a FC
- Art. 110 FC
- Art. 117a FC
- Art. 118 FC
- Art. 123b FC
- Art. 136 FC
- Art. 166 FC
-
- Art. 11 CO
- Art. 12 CO
- Art. 50 CO
- Art. 51 CO
- Art. 84 CO
- Art. 143 CO
- Art. 144 CO
- Art. 145 CO
- Art. 146 CO
- Art. 147 CO
- Art. 148 CO
- Art. 149 CO
- Art. 150 CO
- Art. 701 CO
- Art. 715 CO
- Art. 715a CO
- Art. 734f CO
- Art. 785 CO
- Art. 786 CO
- Art. 787 CO
- Art. 788 CO
- Transitional provisions to the revision of the Stock Corporation Act of June 19, 2020
- Art. 808c CO
-
- Art. 2 PRA
- Art. 3 PRA
- Art. 4 PRA
- Art. 6 PRA
- Art. 10 PRA
- Art. 10a PRA
- Art. 11 PRA
- Art. 12 PRA
- Art. 13 PRA
- Art. 14 PRA
- Art. 15 PRA
- Art. 16 PRA
- Art. 17 PRA
- Art. 19 PRA
- Art. 20 PRA
- Art. 21 PRA
- Art. 22 PRA
- Art. 23 PRA
- Art. 24 PRA
- Art. 25 PRA
- Art. 26 PRA
- Art. 27 PRA
- Art. 29 PRA
- Art. 30 PRA
- Art. 31 PRA
- Art. 32 PRA
- Art. 32a PRA
- Art. 33 PRA
- Art. 34 PRA
- Art. 35 PRA
- Art. 36 PRA
- Art. 37 PRA
- Art. 38 PRA
- Art. 39 PRA
- Art. 40 PRA
- Art. 41 PRA
- Art. 42 PRA
- Art. 43 PRA
- Art. 44 PRA
- Art. 45 PRA
- Art. 46 PRA
- Art. 47 PRA
- Art. 48 PRA
- Art. 49 PRA
- Art. 50 PRA
- Art. 51 PRA
- Art. 52 PRA
- Art. 53 PRA
- Art. 54 PRA
- Art. 55 PRA
- Art. 56 PRA
- Art. 57 PRA
- Art. 58 PRA
- Art. 59a PRA
- Art. 59b PRA
- Art. 59c PRA
- Art. 62 PRA
- Art. 63 PRA
- Art. 67 PRA
- Art. 67a PRA
- Art. 67b PRA
- Art. 75 PRA
- Art. 75a PRA
- Art. 76 PRA
- Art. 76a PRA
- Art. 90 PRA
-
- Vorb. zu Art. 1 FADP
- Art. 1 FADP
- Art. 2 FADP
- Art. 3 FADP
- Art. 5 lit. f und g FADP
- Art. 6 Abs. 6 and 7 FADP
- Art. 7 FADP
- Art. 10 FADP
- Art. 11 FADP
- Art. 12 FADP
- Art. 14 FADP
- Art. 15 FADP
- Art. 19 FADP
- Art. 20 FADP
- Art. 22 FADP
- Art. 23 FADP
- Art. 25 FADP
- Art. 26 FADP
- Art. 27 FADP
- Art. 31 para. 2 lit. e FADP
- Art. 33 FADP
- Art. 34 FADP
- Art. 35 FADP
- Art. 38 FADP
- Art. 39 FADP
- Art. 40 FADP
- Art. 41 FADP
- Art. 42 FADP
- Art. 43 FADP
- Art. 44 FADP
- Art. 44a FADP
- Art. 45 FADP
- Art. 46 FADP
- Art. 47 FADP
- Art. 47a FADP
- Art. 48 FADP
- Art. 49 FADP
- Art. 50 FADP
- Art. 51 FADP
- Art. 54 FADP
- Art. 57 FADP
- Art. 58 FADP
- Art. 60 FADP
- Art. 61 FADP
- Art. 62 FADP
- Art. 63 FADP
- Art. 64 FADP
- Art. 65 FADP
- Art. 66 FADP
- Art. 67 FADP
- Art. 69 FADP
- Art. 72 FADP
- Art. 72a FADP
-
- Art. 2 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 3 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 4 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 5 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 6 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 7 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 8 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 9 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 11 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 12 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 25 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 29 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 32 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 33 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 34 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
FEDERAL CONSTITUTION
CODE OF OBLIGATIONS
FEDERAL LAW ON PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW
LUGANO CONVENTION
CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE
FEDERAL ACT ON POLITICAL RIGHTS
CIVIL CODE
FEDERAL ACT ON CARTELS AND OTHER RESTRAINTS OF COMPETITION
FEDERAL ACT ON INTERNATIONAL MUTUAL ASSISTANCE IN CRIMINAL MATTERS
DEBT ENFORCEMENT AND BANKRUPTCY ACT
FEDERAL ACT ON DATA PROTECTION
SWISS CRIMINAL CODE
CYBERCRIME CONVENTION
- I. History of origin
- II. Significance of the standard
- III. Scope of application of Art. 11b IMAC
- Bibliography
- Materials
I. History of origin
1On March 1, 2019, Art. 11b entered into force as part of the newly introduced Chapter 1b of the Federal Act on International Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters (IMAC). This provision is intended to ensure the protection of personal data in pending mutual assistance proceedings by enshrining a right to information.
2The provision was introduced as part of the total revision of the Federal Act on Data Protection (FADP) and implements the requirements of EU Directive 2016/680 . With the implementation of EU Directive 2016/680 and the introduction of Art. 11b into the IMAC, the federal government is making use of its legislative powers, as intergovernmental cooperation in criminal matters is governed by federal law.
II. Significance of the standard
3The FADP does not apply to international mutual assistance proceedings in criminal matters. The processing of personal data in these mutual assistance proceedings falls within the scope of application of the European legal instrument. Art. 11b IMAC regulates the right to information in the context of pending mutual legal assistance proceedings and thus implements the requirements of Art. 14 and 18 of EU Directive 2016/680, which are also relevant for Switzerland due to Schengen cooperation.
4Art. 11b IMAC is a special right to information in the context of pending mutual assistance proceedings that takes precedence over other procedural provisions. In particular, the application of the provisions of the Swiss Code of Criminal Procedure (CrimPC) on data processing is excluded.
5The application of Art. 11b IMAC is not limited to federal authorities such as the Office of the Attorney General of Switzerland or the Federal Office of Justice. The provision applies to all authorities, including cantonal authorities, that are involved in supporting mutual legal assistance proceedings or that decide on foreign requests for mutual legal assistance.
III. Scope of application of Art. 11b IMAC
A. Scope of application of the right to information (Art. 11b para. 1 IMAC)
6Art. 11b IMAC basically serves to strike a balance between procedural rights and data protection. In particular, the provision takes account of the need for special data protection regulations to protect personal data during pending mutual assistance proceedings. The right to information in Art. 11b IMAC enables the requesting persons to obtain transparency regarding the processing of their personal data by the authorities.
7The provision grants a person who is the subject of a request for intergovernmental cooperation in criminal matters the right to access their personal data and the information listed in Art. 11b para. 1 lit. a-e IMAC. At the same time, the competent authorities that process personal data in the context of mutual assistance proceedings are subject to corresponding information obligations.
8 Accordingly, the person concerned has the right of access to the personal data relating to them. According to Art. 5 lit. a FADP, this includes "all information relating to an identified or identifiable natural person" and all information listed exhaustively in Art. 11b para. 1 lit. a-e IMAC.
9 Pursuant to Art. 11b para. 1 IMAC, the data subject has the right to obtain information about the processing of their personal data. This initially includes the right to know the purpose and legal basis of the processing. Data processing includes all operations relating to personal data, regardless of the means and procedures used, in particular the collection, storage, retention, use, modification, disclosure, archiving, deletion or destruction of data. The data subject also has the right to know how long their data will be stored or, if this is not possible, at least the criteria for determining this period. In addition, the competent authority may provide them with information about the recipients or categories of recipients of their personal data and the available information about the origin of this data. Finally, the data subject has the right of access to information that is necessary for the effective exercise of their rights. This means, among other things, that the competent authority must inform the data subject that their data protection claims are being assessed in the context of pending mutual legal assistance proceedings and are subject to the same legal remedies.
10 A person who is the subject of a request for international cooperation in criminal matters may object to the unlawful processing of their personal data in accordance with Art. 11d IMAC. They may demand that the competent authorities rectify or erase unlawfully processed personal data in accordance with the provisions of the IMAC. However, the deletion of personal data is subject to exceptions in accordance with Art. 11dpara. 2 IMAC. In certain cases, personal data cannot be deleted, but only "restricted" in its processing. This means that the data is not deleted completely, but access and processing is restricted.
B. Addressees of the right to information
11 According to Art. 11b para. 1 IMAC, the right to information differs from that under Art. 14 and 16 of EU Directive 2016/680 in that only the "person against whom a request for intergovernmental cooperation is made" and not the "person concerned" is entitled to information.
12 In contrast to the provision in Art. 11bpara. 1 IMAC, EU Directive 2016/680 assumes that the processing of personal data in mutual legal assistance proceedings potentially affects different categories of persons who could be entitled to the right of access. Accordingly, according to EU Directive 2016/680, all "data subjects" should have a right of access, in particular suspects, convicted offenders, victims and other parties such as witnesses, persons with relevant information or persons in contact or associated with suspects or convicted offenders.
13 However, it follows from Art. 11b IMAC that only persons against whom a request for mutual legal assistance is directed are entitled to receive information. This shows that the Swiss legislator apparently wanted to limit the group of persons entitled to receive information to a narrowly defined group of authorized persons - similar to the eligibility for appeal in the IMAC - contrary to the requirements of EU Directive 2016/680.
14 The provision of Art. 11b para. 1 IMAC, according to which only the persons against whom the request for mutual legal assistance is directed are entitled to the right to information, is also in conflict with other data protection provisions of the IMAC. In particular, it violates the authorization provision in Art. 11h para. 2 lit. a IMAC, which was issued in implementation of Art. 6 of EU Directive 2016/680. This provision requires the competent authorities to distinguish between different categories of persons when processing personal data.
15 The right to information under Art. 11b IMAC is also handled more restrictively than in domestic criminal proceedings. According to Art. 97 CrimPC, not only the "parties" to pending criminal proceedings, but also "other parties to the proceedings" have the right to information about the personal data concerning them. These parties to the proceedings include injured persons, persons making a complaint, witnesses, persons providing information, experts or third parties adversely affected by procedural acts. Conversely, persons who do not belong to any of these categories have no right to information under Art. 97 CrimPC, even if their personal data is being processed in pending criminal proceedings.
16 From a fundamental rights and human rights perspective, the restrictive regulation of persons entitled to information under Art. 11b IMAC means that persons whose rights under Art. 13 para. 2 FC and Art. 8 ECHR are affected are denied the right to information in legal assistance proceedings. For example, witnesses or third parties adversely affected by proceedings have no right to information under Art. 11b para. 1 IMAC, even if their personal data is contained in the case files. Although Art. 8 para. 1 ECHR does not provide for an explicit right to information for individuals, the lack of legal protection in the area of data protection can lead to a violation of the right to an effective remedy under Art. 13 ECHR.
17 The right to information in the context of pending mutual legal assistance proceedings pursuant to Art. 11b IMAC is therefore more restrictive than in the relevant Swiss and EU provisions. This is contrary to the aim and purpose of Art. 11b IMAC, which is to be interpreted as a data protection provision within the meaning of EU Directive 2016/680. The literature therefore takes the view that an overly narrow interpretation should be avoided and that the persons concerned should be granted access to their personal data in pending mutual legal assistance proceedings. In a ruling on the transfer of documents issued by lawyers, the Federal Supreme Court also pointed out that there may be exceptions in connection with the provisions on the protection of personal data (Art. 11b et seq. IMAC).
C. Restrictions (Art. 11b para. 2 IMAC)
18 The right to information under Art. 11b para. 1 IMAC is not absolute. The possible grounds for restricting the right to information are broadly defined in the provision. According to Art. 11b para. 2 IMAC, the competent authority may refuse, restrict or postpone the provision of information if there are grounds pursuant to Art. 80b para. 2 IMAC or if one of the conditions pursuant to Art. 11b para. 2 lit. a-c IMAC is met.
19 Pursuant to Art. 11b para. 2 lit. a-c IMAC, the right to information of affected persons may be restricted if overriding interests of third parties (lit. a) or overriding public interests, in particular with regard to the internal or external security of Switzerland (lit. b), so require. In addition, the right to information may be restricted if the disclosure of personal data could jeopardize an investigation, an inquiry, legal proceedings or international mutual legal assistance proceedings (lit. c).
20 The list in Art. 11b para. 2 IMAC is not exhaustive. In individual cases, the authority may rely on further grounds to restrict the right to information in pending mutual assistance proceedings.
21 In addition to the grounds for restriction listed in Art. 11b para. 2 lit. a-c IMAC, the grounds listed in Art. 80b para. 2 lit. a-e IMAC also apply to the right to information. Accordingly, the right to information may be restricted if this is in the interests of foreign proceedings (lit. a). This applies in particular to cases where there is a risk of collusion and there are indications that the persons entitled to information under Art. 11b IMAC could indirectly gain access to evidence from the mutual legal assistance proceedings and thus jeopardize the integrity of the foreign criminal proceedings. The protection of a substantial legal interest, if the requesting state so requires (lit. b), as well as the nature or urgency of the measure to be taken (lit. c) may also lead to a restriction of the right to information. This applies in particular to cases of precautionary measures in which the right to information can only be granted after such measures have been ordered, for example to secure evidence such as the blocking of a bank account. A restriction is also possible to protect essential private interests (lit. d), such as in particular private confidentiality interests or to protect the safety of persons (e.g. psychological integrity). Finally, under certain circumstances it may be appropriate not to provide information to the persons concerned if parallel proceedings are ongoing in Switzerland and the disclosure of personal data would jeopardize the evidence in the mutual legal assistance proceedings (lit. e).
22 The grounds for restriction provided for in Art. 80b para. 2 and Art. 11b para. 2 IMAC may overlap to some extent. However, the decision of the competent authority to refuse, restrict or postpone the provision of information must be justified. However, this justification must be given in such a way that the refused information is not disclosed.
23 A further restriction of the right to information pursuant to Art. 11b IMAC arises from the general scope of the IMAC. The IMAC, including Art. 11b IMAC, does not apply to mutual assistance proceedings in criminal matters if Switzerland is bound to the requesting state by an international mutual assistance treaty in criminal matters.
24 Thus, in a specific case of criminal mutual assistance proceedings in which Switzerland and Ukraine were bound by the European Mutual Assistance Convention (EUeR), the Federal Criminal Court held that the data protection provision - in this case Art. 11f IMAC - was not applicable to states that guarantee an adequate level of data protection. The right to information under Art. 11b IMAC (as well as Art. 11f IMAC) is therefore subsidiary in nature, regardless of whether it is asserted by a person directly affected by a request for mutual legal assistance or by a third party not directly affected.
25 However, an exclusion of the right to information on the basis of a treaty is only possible if the level of protection of the international mutual assistance treaty with regard to the right to information corresponds to that of the IMAC. This also follows from the principle of favorability, according to which domestic law may not provide for more restrictive conditions than treaty law. Otherwise, the data protection standards pursuant to Art. 11b IMAC would have to be applied despite a special mutual legal assistance treaty between Switzerland and the requesting state.
Bibliography
Drechsler Christian, Kommentierung zu Art. 2 DSG, in: Vasella David/Blechta Gabor P. (Hrsg.), Basler Kommentar, Datenschutzgesetz Öffentlichkeitsgesetz, 4. Aufl., Basel 2024.
Fiolka Gerhard, Kommentierung zu Art. 97 StPO, in: Niggli Marcel Alexander/Heer Marianne/Wiprächtiger Hans (Hrsg.), Basler Kommentar, Schweizerische Strafprozessordnung, 2. Aufl., Basel 2011.
Gless Sabine, Internationales Strafrecht, 3. Aufl., Zürich 2021.
Heimgartner Stefan/Niggli Marcel Alexander, Kommentierung zu Art. 80b, in: Niggli Marcel Alexander/Heimgartner Stefan (Hrsg.), Basler Kommentar, Internationales Strafrecht, Basel 2015.
Ludwiczak Glassey Maria, Kommentierung zu Art. 11b IRSG, in: Ludwiczak Glassey Maria/Moreillon Laurent (Hrsg), Petit commentaire loi fédérale sur l’entraide internationale en matière pénale, Basel 2024.
Ludwiczak Glassey Maria/Bonzanigo Francesca, Protection des données et coopération internationale, AJP 2021, S. 998.
Ludwiczak Glassey Maria/Bonzanigo Francesca, Qualité pour recourir de certaines entités particulières en entraide pénale internationale: hoirie, société dissoute et liquidée et trust, AJP 2022, S. 146.
Ludwiczak Glassey Maria/Wahl Thomas, Chronique de droit pénal suisse dans le domaine international (2021), SRIEL 2022, S. 451.
Meyer Frank, Kommentierung zu Art. 8 EMRK, in: Wolter Jürgen (Hrsg.), Systematischer Kommentar zur Strafprozessordnung, Band X, 5. Aufl., Köln 2018.
Stelzer-Więckowska Marta, Die kleine Rechtshilfe in Strafsachen: grundrechtliche Stellung der betroffenen Person, Zürich 2022.
Materials
Botschaft vom 21.12.2005 zur Vereinheitlichung des Strafprozessrechts, BBl 2006 1085, abrufbar unter: https://www.fedlex.admin.ch/eli/fga/2006/124/de (zuletzt besucht am 1.7.2024).
EJPD, Erläuternder Bericht zum Vorentwurf für das Bundesgesetz über die Totalrevision des Datenschutzgesetzes und die Änderung weiterer Erlasse zum Datenschutz, 21.12.2016, abrufbar unter: https://www.newsd.admin.ch/newsd/message/attachments/75576.pdf (zuletzt besucht am 1.7.2024).
Botschaft vom 15.9.2017 zum Bundesgesetz über die Totalrevision des Bundesgesetzes über den Datenschutz und die Änderung weiterer Erlasse zum Datenschutz, BBl 2017 6941, abrufbar unter https://www.fedlex.admin.ch/eli/fga/2017/2057/de (zuletzt besucht am 1.7.2024).