-
- Art. 3 FC
- Art. 5a FC
- Art. 6 FC
- Art. 10 FC
- Art. 13 FC
- Art. 16 FC
- Art. 17 FC
- Art. 20 FC
- Art. 22 FC
- Art. 26 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. 1 FC
- Art. 96 para. 2 lit. a FC
- Art. 110 FC
- Art. 117a FC
- Art. 118 FC
- Art. 123a FC
- Art. 123b FC
- Art. 130 FC
- Art. 136 FC
- Art. 166 FC
- Art. 178 FC
- Art. 191 FC
-
- Art. 11 CO
- Art. 12 CO
- Art. 50 CO
- Art. 51 CO
- Art. 84 CO
- Art. 97 CO
- Art. 98 CO
- Art. 99 CO
- Art. 100 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
- Art. 808c CO
- Transitional provisions to the revision of the Stock Corporation Act of June 19, 2020
-
- 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. 60 PRA
- Art. 60a PRA
- Art. 62 PRA
- Art. 63 PRA
- Art. 64 PRA
- Art. 67 PRA
- Art. 67a PRA
- Art. 67b PRA
- Art. 73 PRA
- Art. 73a 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. 4 FADP
- Art. 5 lit. d FADP
- Art. 5 lit. f und g FADP
- Art. 6 para. 3-5 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. 52 FADP
- Art. 54 FADP
- Art. 55 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. 16 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 18 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 25 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 27 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 28 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)
-
- Art. 2 para. 1 AMLA
- Art. 2a para. 1-2 and 4-5 AMLA
- Art. 3 AMLA
- Art. 7 AMLA
- Art. 7a AMLA
- Art. 8 AMLA
- Art. 8a AMLA
- Art. 11 AMLA
- Art. 14 AMLA
- Art. 15 AMLA
- Art. 20 AMLA
- Art. 23 AMLA
- Art. 24 AMLA
- Art. 24a AMLA
- Art. 25 AMLA
- Art. 26 AMLA
- Art. 26a AMLA
- Art. 27 AMLA
- Art. 28 AMLA
- Art. 29 AMLA
- Art. 29a AMLA
- Art. 29b AMLA
- Art. 30 AMLA
- Art. 31 AMLA
- Art. 31a AMLA
- Art. 32 AMLA
- Art. 38 AMLA
FEDERAL CONSTITUTION
MEDICAL DEVICES ORDINANCE
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
COMMERCIAL REGISTER ORDINANCE
FEDERAL ACT ON COMBATING MONEY LAUNDERING AND TERRORIST FINANCING
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT
FEDERAL ACT ON THE INTERNATIONAL TRANSFER OF CULTURAL PROPERTY
- I. General
- II. Concept of minor mutual assistance and requirement of necessity, Art. 63 para. 1 IMAC
- III. Minor measures of mutual assistance, Art. 63 para. 2 IMAC
- IV. “Proceedings in criminal matters,” Art. 63 para. 3 IMAC
- V. Recipients of minor mutual assistance, Art. 63 para. 4 IMAC
- VI. Mutual assistance to exonerate the person being prosecuted, Art. 63 para. 5 IMAC
- Bibliography
- Materials
I. General
A. History of the provision
1 Art. 63 IMAC has not been significantly amended since the Act entered into force. As part of the revision of the IMAC in 1995, the examples of mutual assistance measures in para. 2 were reorganized and supplemented to better reflect the activities of the executing authorities. Selected forms of taking evidence were expressly mentioned (para. 2 lit. b). The surrender of objects or assets for confiscation or restitution, which is now regulated in Art. 74a IMAC, was included in Art. 63 para. 2 lit. d IMAC. For systematic reasons, transit was moved to another section of the IMAC (Art. 20a IMAC).
2 The draft IMAC also contained a provision intended to regulate more precisely the protection of confidential information, in particular from third parties (Art. 61 E-IMAC). This is probably why the message did not go into detail on the requirement that the mutual assistance measure be necessary (Art. 63 para. 1 IMAC), even though the interpretation of this term is important for protecting the privacy of persons affected by mutual assistance. The version of the law that entered into force does not contain Art. 61 E-IMAC or a corresponding provision is not to be found in the version of the law that has entered into force. The interpretation of the concept of the necessity of the mutual assistance measure was thus left to the courts (see principle of proportionality below n. 17 ff.).
B. Significance of the provision and relationship to other provisions
3 Art. 63 IMAC explains the concept of minor mutual assistance (also referred to as accessory mutual assistance). Para. 1 also contains an important provision establishing the principle of proportionality of mutual assistance measures/mutual assistance (see n. 17 ff. below).
4 Art. 63 IMAC and the entire third part of the IMAC contain only a few details on specific mutual assistance measures. According to Art. 12 para. 1 IMAC, procedural acts must be carried out in accordance with the applicable criminal procedure law. The more detailed provisions concerning the implementation of specific measures (e.g., hearings, searches) are therefore generally to be found in the CrimPC (enforcing authority: public prosecutor's office) or in the VStrR (enforcing authority: federal administrative authority).
5 Certain measures are regulated in more detail in other provisions of the IMAC and the IMACV (e.g., service of documents, Art. 68 f. IMAC, Art. 29 f. IMACV; surrender of evidence, Art. 74 IMAC; seizure and surrender for confiscation or return, Art. 74a IMAC, Art. 33a IMACV)..
6 Art. 75 IMAC specifies who may submit a request for minor mutual assistance under Art. 63 IMAC (“the authorities responsible for prosecuting offences or for deciding on other proceedings to which this Act applies”).
7 The highest police authorities of the Confederation and the cantons may also submit requests for minor mutual assistance in their own name under Art. 75a IMAC if the measures do not involve the use of procedural coercion (Art. 75a para. 2 lit. a IMAC, see also Art. 35 IMAC) and do not involve the surrender of criminal judgments or criminal files (Art. 75a para. 2 lit. c IMAC). Such cases systematically fall within the scope of police cooperation. If Swiss police authorities are requested to provide assistance, this is done without issuing a final decision (see Art. 35 IRSV). The person who may be affected by the measure has no legal remedy and the requirement of double criminality does not apply.
8 According to Art. 63 para. 3 lit. a IMAC, minor mutual assistance is provided in the prosecution of criminal offenses under Art. 1 para. 3 IMAC, i.e., in criminal matters in which, under the law of the requesting state, the judge may be called upon. Art. 63 para. 3 lit. b-d IMAC specifies what is meant by this and lists examples of proceedings related to criminal proceedings in which minor mutual assistance may be provided (administrative measures against an offender, the enforcement of criminal judgments, and pardon and compensation for unjustified detention).
II. Concept of minor mutual assistance and requirement of necessity, Art. 63 para. 1 IMAC
A. Content
9 Art. 63 para. 1 IMAC comments on the scope and purpose of minor mutual assistance.
1. Information
10 Minor mutual assistance may consist, among other things, in the transmission of information which is already available to the authorities or which can be obtained without the use of coercion. This includes, for example, information from the criminal register or information on the identity or whereabouts of a person (see also Art. 77 para. 2 IMAC). The transmission of such information does not generally involve any or only a minor infringement of fundamental rights. The provision of information on criminal law or criminal procedure law does not fall under minor mutual assistance.
11 The transmission of certain documents and information may also take place within the framework of the police cooperation referred to in Art. 75a IMAC (see N. 7 above).
2. Procedural acts and other official acts
12 According to Art. 63 para. 1 IMAC, minor mutual assistance consists of procedural acts that are permissible under Swiss law. Various measures that are not individually mentioned in the IMAC and to which criminal procedure law applies are possible (see also Art. 12 para. 1 IMAC). These may be coercive measures (e.g., searches, see Art. 196 ff. and Art. 241 ff. CrimPC) or acts without coercion (service of documents, see Art. 68 and Art. 69 para. 2 IMAC; Editions).
13 Despite these elements of criminal procedure, it is assumed that mutual assistance proceedings in general, and minor mutual assistance proceedings in particular, are proceedings of an administrative law nature, in which the rules of criminal procedure apply only when criminal procedural measures are carried out.
14 The performance of acts that are permissible under the law of the requesting state or under an international agreement and are not provided for in Swiss criminal procedure law is not permissible.
15 The term “other official acts” was not defined in the IMAC. According to Art. 25 IRSV, the surveillance of persons given a suspended sentence or released from prison on parole is also considered an official act. Art. 271 SCC is relevant for determining the meaning of the term “official act.” This article penalizes the performance of acts for a foreign state on Swiss territory without authorization if they are intended for an authority or a public official. This indirectly determines which sovereign acts are to be performed by way of mutual legal assistance as a result of the principles of sovereignty and territoriality.
B. Necessity for the foreign proceedings
16 According to Art. 63 para. 1 IMAC, the measures must appear necessary for the proceedings abroad or serve to return the proceeds of crime.
17 The necessity of minor mutual assistance for the foreign proceedings or for the recovery of the proceeds determines the scope of the mutual assistance to be provided and is regarded as an expression of the principle of proportionality. First, the requested measure must be appropriate, necessary, and proportionate in the strict sense. Secondly, there must be a sufficient connection between the measure and the foreign criminal proceedings (prohibition of unlawful gathering of evidence/fishing expeditions).
18 It is not a prerequisite that the requesting authority has exhausted its own possibilities for obtaining evidence (no subsidiarity of minor mutual legal assistance as such).
1. Connection to the offense
19 The request for legal assistance, in particular the attached facts (see Art. 28 para. 3 lit. a IMAC), must show that there is a connection between the requested measures and the foreign criminal proceedings.
20 The requesting authority should be assisted in clarifying the facts of the case through the provision of mutual legal assistance. For this reason, it is not required that it present the facts of the case completely and without contradiction in the request for mutual legal assistance.
21 The Swiss authority to which the request is addressed is in principle bound by the statement of facts in the request, unless the facts are “immediately invalidated by obvious errors, omissions, or contradictions.” Overall, great trust is placed in the content of the request for legal assistance and the statements made by the requesting state.
22 On the basis of the information contained in the request for legal assistance, the requested authority should be in a position to verify the condition of double criminality if coercive measures within the meaning of Art. 64 para. 1 IMAC have been requested and to verify whether the offense is one for which legal assistance is permissible (see in particular Art. 3 IMAC).
23 There is no connection with the offense if the measures requested “are not related to the offense being prosecuted and are clearly unsuitable for advancing the investigation” and are “certainly not relevant” to the proceedings abroad. The potential relevance of the measures for the proceedings abroad is sufficient in principle.
24 The assessment of evidence, the determination of facts and the decision on the guilt of the person being prosecuted are the responsibility of the foreign court with jurisdiction and not of the requested authority. The requested state may not “replace the assessment of the authority conducting the investigation with its own (...)” because it "(...) does not have the means that would allow it to rule on the appropriateness of certain evidence in foreign proceedings." The decision as to whether the evidence requested is necessary for the criminal proceedings is therefore generally left to the requesting state and is only questioned in exceptional cases.
2. Obligations to cooperate in the assessment of proportionality
25 It is generally the responsibility of the requested state to verify whether there is a connection between the requested mutual assistance measures and the proceedings abroad. The person affected by the mutual assistance measure is also obliged to cooperate, particularly in complex investigations and where there is extensive evidence, because the requested authority has only limited possibilities to determine which items of evidence are irrelevant to the proceedings in the requesting state. According to the Federal Supreme Court, the obligation to cooperate arises from Art. 5 para. 3 FC (state organs and private individuals must act in good faith).
26 The person concerned must formulate any objections to the transfer of evidence in good time (already at the stage of execution of the request) and provide sufficient reasons. They are obliged to “clearly and precisely indicate to what extent the documents and information to be transferred exceed the scope of the request or are of no interest to the foreign proceedings.”. Objections that are not sufficiently substantiated may be classified as an inadmissible counterstatement of the facts and will not be taken into account.
27 According to the Federal Supreme Court, a lack of knowledge of the official language does not exempt the person concerned from their duty to cooperate. If the person concerned did not raise any objections in the first instance proceedings, even though they had the opportunity to do so, they may not do so in the appeal proceedings. If it was not possible to raise objections in the first instance proceedings, the person concerned is obliged to do so in the appeal proceedings.
28 However, the obligation of the person concerned to cooperate does not release the executing authority from its obligation to carry out a triage of the seized documents.
3. Prohibition of excessive measures
29 The requested state may only provide the requesting state with mutual legal assistance to the extent that it has been requested (prohibition of excessive measures).
30 However, according to case law, the request for legal assistance must be interpreted generously in favor of the requesting state in order to avoid supplementary requests and unnecessary delays. In accordance with the principle of expeditiousness and mutual legal assistance, evidence may also be transmitted which is not directly related to the facts described in the request for legal assistance.
31 The prohibition of excessive measures is also mitigated by the fact that information which is not directly relevant may, under certain circumstances, be transmitted as potentially exculpatory.
III. Minor measures of mutual assistance, Art. 63 para. 2 IMAC
A. General
32 Art. 63 para. 2 IMAC contains a non-exhaustive list of mutual assistance measures. The measures expressly mentioned therein, namely service of documents, searches, seizures, hearings, and the surrender of files, documents, objects, and assets, are among the most common measures of ancillary mutual assistance and are also provided for in national criminal procedure.
33 More modern measures of evidence gathering or measures that only come into question in cross-border cases were not mentioned in Art. 63 IMAC. Certain newer measures of evidence gathering were partially regulated elsewhere in the IMAC (surveillance of postal and telecommunications traffic, Art. 18a IMAC; real-time monitoring and transmission of electronic traffic data, Art. 18b IMAC).
34 Other measures can be found in international agreements (e.g. hearing by videoconference, Art. 9 ZP II to EÜR; immediate securing of computer data, Art. 29 CCC; the collection of traffic data and content data in real time, Art. 33 f. CCC; controlled delivery, Art. 18 ZP II EÜR; covert investigation, Art. 19 ZP II EÜR).
35 Minor mutual legal assistance also includes cross-border surveillance (Art. 17 ZP II EÜR) and joint investigation teams (Art. 80dter ff. IRSG and Art. 20 ZP II EÜR).
36 According to Art. 63 para. 1 IMAC, other measures provided for in the CrimPC are also permissible, even if they are not regulated in the IMAC (e.g. surveillance of bank accounts, Art. 284 f. CrimPC, DNA analysis, Art. 255 ff. CrimPC, identification records, handwriting and voice samples, Art. 260 ff. CrimPC). Due to the principle of favor in mutual legal assistance law, the measures provided for in the IMAC and the CrimPC are also permissible in contractual mutual legal assistance even if they were not provided for in the specific agreement.
B. Service of documents (Art. 63 para. 2 lit. a IMAC)
37 In the case of service of documents, the requirement of double criminality does not have to be met because the measure is taken without the use of coercion (see Art. 64 para. 1 IMAC).
38 Further rules concerning service, in particular summonses, are contained in Art. 68 and Art. 69 IMAC. The person who receives a summons is not obliged to comply with it (Art. 69 para. 1 IMAC).
39 Summonses containing threats of coercion are not served (Art. 63 para. 2 IMAC). Decisions and penalty orders are criminal judgments which must in principle be served through the channels of mutual assistance.
40 With the exception of summonses, documents may be served directly by post on persons who are not themselves being prosecuted in the foreign proceedings (Art. 30 para. 1 IRSV). Documents within the meaning of Art. 30 para. 1 IRSV include court files and other documents relating to foreign proceedings. Direct service of documents in criminal matters by post is permissible in the case of traffic offences (Art. 30 para. 2 IRSV). Direct service is also permissible if this has been agreed between Switzerland and the foreign state under international law (multilateral or bilateral). Within Europe, certain court documents can be served directly on the basis of Art. 52 para. 1 SDÜ.
C. Taking of evidence (Art. 63 para. 2 lit. b IMAC)
1. General
41 Art. 63 para. 2 lit. b IMAC contains a non-exhaustive list of measures of assistance in obtaining evidence. As indicated above (n. 32 ff.), measures of evidence gathering are permissible if they are provided for in Swiss criminal procedure law or in multilateral or bilateral mutual assistance treaties. They are usually ordered in an interim decision.
42 Certain measures for the taking of evidence, in particular the securing of endangered evidence, may be ordered as provisional measures under Art. 18 IMAC.
2. Hearings
43 Under Art. 12 para. 1 IMAC, Art. 142 ff. CrimPC (the general rules) apply to hearings, as well as the provisions governing the hearing of the accused (Art. 157 ff. CrimPC), witnesses (Art. 162 ff. CrimPC) and persons providing information (Art. 178 ff. CrimPC).
44 The role in which the person is to be heard should generally be specified in the request for legal assistance (see Art. 28 IMAC). If there are doubts in this regard or if contradictions are apparent in the request for mutual assistance, it is appropriate for the requesting state to amend/supplement the request within the meaning of Art. 78 para. 3 or Art. 80o IMAC.
45 The person being heard is entitled to the rights to refuse to testify provided for in Swiss law (Art. 9 IMAC). In addition, the rights to refuse to testify of the requesting state also apply (Art. 65 para. 3 IMAC).
46 Under Art. 65 para. 3 IMAC, the person being questioned may also refuse to testify if, under the law of the requesting state or the state in which the person making the statement resides, criminal or disciplinary consequences.
47 At the express request of the foreign state, special forms of confirmation provided for in the law of the requesting state may be observed when hearing witnesses and experts (Art. 65 para. 1 lit. a IMAC). This is subject to the condition that they are compatible with Swiss law and do not cause any significant disadvantages for the person concerned (Art. 65 para. 2 IMAC).
48 One measure of minor mutual assistance is the classic hearing of a person on site, but also in the form of a videoconference (Art. 144 CrimPC in conjunction with Art. 12 para. 1 IMAC, see also Art. 9 ZP II EÜR).
49 The hearing by video conference is conducted by the authority of the requesting state in accordance with its law, pursuant to Art. 9 para. 5 lit. c ZP II to EÜR. In this respect, it differs from the classic hearing on site. The requested authority shall draw up a report and intervene if the hearing violates the fundamental principles of the legal system of the requested state (Art. 9 para. 5 lit. c and para. 6 ZP II EÜR).
50 Since the requesting authority asks the questions directly and obtains the information immediately before the conclusion of the mutual assistance proceedings, the requirements of Art. 65a IRSG must be met for the presence of the foreign parties to the proceedings.M., the conditions for the presence of the foreign parties to the proceedings under Art. 65a IMAC must be met. The same precautionary measures must be taken as would be necessary if the foreign authority were present on site (e.g. the obligation of the requested authority not to use the information before the mutual assistance proceedings have been legally concluded).
51 Under prevailing opinion, telephone tapping as a form of mutual legal assistance is considered inadmissible in Switzerland because it is not regulated in Swiss criminal procedure law. This is despite the fact that it is provided for in Art. 10 ZP II EÜR.
3. Searches
52 Searches under mutual legal assistance serve to locate objects, documents or assets that are to be handed over to the requesting state either as evidence or for confiscation or restitution under Art. 74 or 74a IMAC.
53 The IMAC does not contain any special provisions concerning the conduct of searches. Pursuant to Art. 12 para. 1 IMAC, the general provisions on searches and investigations (Art. 241 ff. CrimPC), on the search of houses, apartments and rooms not accessible to the public (Art. 244 f. CrimPC) and on the search of records (Art. 246 ff. CrimPC) apply. The general requirements for coercive measures (Art. 197 ff. CrimPC) must also be observed, in particular the requirements for the proportionality of the measure (Art. 197 CrimPC).
54 Art. 9 sentence 2 IMAC emphasizes that the relevant provisions of the CrimPC (Art. 246–248 CrimPC) apply mutatis mutandis to the search of records. The requested authority often has to deal with extensive documentation. Under certain circumstances, it may therefore be necessary to first carry out a rough triage and then the actual triage of the documents or data.
55 The requested authority sorts out the items of evidence that are not relevant to the foreign proceedings (see above N. 25 ff. and N. 29 ff.). The sorting may be carried out according to specific “keywords.” Persons may also be called in to assist the requested authority with the actual sorting (see Art. 65a IMAC). However, the person who has the right to participate under Art. 80b IMAC is not entitled to be present during the sorting.
56 Art. 9a lit. b IRSV specifies that in the case of house searches, the owner or tenant is considered to be personally and directly affected within the meaning of Art. 21 para. 3 and Art. 80h IMAC. Therefore, only the person who has actual control over the searched premises is entitled to lodge a complaint.
57 Of practical importance in mutual legal assistance proceedings is the possibility of sealing records and objects under Art. 248 CrimPC. Sealing is intended to prevent the executing authority from gaining knowledge of information that is irrelevant to the proceedings in the requesting state.
58 It is partly disputed whether only the actual owner of records is entitled to seal them or whether other persons who have a legally protected interest in the records are also entitled to do so. However, it is postulated that the right to seal may also be granted to other interested persons, even if they are not considered to have standing to appeal within the meaning of Art. 80h lit. b IMAC. The Federal Supreme Court has left open the question of the extent to which sealing not only protects the right to refuse to give evidence in order to protect the privacy sphere, but also, for example, obstacles to mutual legal assistance.
59 The competent cantonal coercive measures court (if the executing authority is a cantonal authority or the Office of the Attorney General of Switzerland) or the Appeals Chamber of the Federal Criminal Court (if the mutual legal assistance measure is carried out by a federal administrative authority) shall decide on the unsealing.
60 The decision on unsealing is treated as an interim order of the court responsible for coercive measures in mutual legal assistance proceedings and no criminal procedural remedies may be lodged.
61 Under Art. 80e para. 2 IMAC, a decision on the unsealing of documents is in principle not independently appealable, as the executing authority's knowledge of the contents of the records does not entail any “irreparable disadvantage”; any disadvantage only arises when the records are handed over to the requesting authority, and this is only decided in the final decision. The decision on the unsealing can therefore generally only be challenged together with the final decision (see Art. 80e para. 1 IMAC).
62 According to Art. 76 lit. c IMAC, the state requesting the search must enclose with its request a confirmation of the admissibility of the measure. The search or seizure warrant attached to the request is considered sufficient confirmation (Art. 31 para. 2 IMAC).
4. Seizure of objects and assets
63 According to Art. 12 para. 1 IMAC, the provisions of criminal procedure concerning seizure apply (Art. 263 ff. CrimPC). The seizure of objects and assets used as evidence (Art. 263 para. 1 lit. a CrimPC; see also Art. 74 IMAC), preventive seizure and seizure of assets (Art. 263 para. 1 lit. d CrimPC) and seizure for the purpose of return to the injured party (Art. 263 para. 1 lit. c CrimPC).
64 According to the Federal Supreme Court, surrender for the purpose of settling substitute claims (and also the seizure of assets for this purpose) is not possible within the framework of minor mutual assistance. In such cases, however, mutual assistance in enforcement under Art. 94 ff. IMAC may be considered.
65 Art. 33a IRSV mentions the permissible duration of seizure of objects or assets that are to be surrendered on the basis of a final and enforceable decision of the requesting state (see Art. 74a para. 3 IMAC). These remain seized until the decision is available or the requesting state informs the requesting authority that such a decision can no longer be made (in particular due to the statute of limitations).
66 Frequent mutual assistance measures include the secret freezing of accounts, which is not regulated by law. The legal basis for this measure is Art. 80n IMAC and Art. 8 para. 2 BG-RVUS.
67 Seizure may take longer in the case of minor mutual assistance under Art. 74a IMAC, as a final decision by the requesting state must generally be available (see Art. 74 para. 3 IMAC) or the conditions for so-called early release must be met.
68 Whether the duration of the seizure is still proportionate depends on the circumstances of the specific case. Seizure lasting up to two years is generally considered proportionate. In the case of longer measures, the complexity of the proceedings and the actions or inaction of the requesting and requested authorities are taken into account. However, it is not possible to set a fixed limit beyond which longer seizure would be disproportionate.
5. Secret surveillance measures
69 In the case of surveillance measures, it is often necessary for tactical reasons to transfer the evidence gathered for the purposes of foreign proceedings before the mutual assistance proceedings have been concluded (see also Art. 80dbis IMAC, known as dynamic mutual assistance).
70 One measure of minor mutual assistance is the surveillance of postal and telecommunications traffic (Art. 18a para. 2 ff. IMAC). It is generally undisputed that these measures are permissible within the framework of mutual assistance. In addition to the requirements of mutual legal assistance law, however, the requirements of Art. 269 ff. CrimPC must also be cumulatively fulfilled (see Art. 18a para. 4 IMAC).
71 Art. 18b IMAC provides for the transmission of electronic traffic data. This does not refer to content data, but to other data collected in connection with the surveillance. The possibility of early transmission of content data is therefore governed by Art. 80dbis IMAC.
72 Surveillance using technical surveillance devices (Art. 280 f. CrimPC) is mentioned in Art. 18b para. 1 lit. b IMAC. Surveillance devices within the meaning of Art. 280 CrimPC include, for example, bugs, cameras, GPS trackers, and methods of monitoring electronic devices (e.g., keyloggers). It is partly disputed whether Art. 18b para. 1 lit. b IMAC provides a sufficient legal basis for ordering these measures in mutual assistance proceedings.
73 Covert investigations and cross-border surveillance in the context of minor mutual assistance were not provided for in the IMAC and are therefore only permissible if permitted by an international treaty. Covert investigation is therefore possible on the basis of Art. 19 ZP II EÜR, and cross-border surveillance is regulated in Art. 17 ZP II EÜR, as well as in the context of police cooperation in Art. 40 SDÜ and in agreements with certain European countries.
D. Surrender of files and documents (Art. 63 para. 2 lit. c IMAC)
74 Art. 63 para. 2 lit. c IMAC refers to surrender for the purposes of evidence (Art. 74 para. 1 IMAC). Art. 74 para. 1 IMAC regulates additional aspects of the surrender of evidence (including the rights of bona fide third parties, Art. 71 para. 2 IMAC, and the postponement of surrender, Art. 74 para. 3 IMAC).
75 Art. 63 para. 2 lit. c IMAC only mentions files and documents. However, other evidence (objects, assets) may also be surrendered (see Art. 74 para. 1 IMAC).
76 This may be evidence that is already in the possession of the requested authority or that can be obtained without the use of coercion (e.g., files, interrogation records from other proceedings). However, evidence that the executing authority must first obtain (see Art. 63 para. 2 lit. b IMAC above) may also be considered.
E. Surrender of objects or assets for confiscation or return to the entitled party (Art. 63 para. 2 lit. d IMAC)
77 The surrender of objects or assets for confiscation or return is regulated in Art. 74a IMAC.
78 It also specifies which objects or assets may be surrendered (Art. 74a para. 2 lit. a-c IMAC) and when and under what conditions surrender may take place (Art. 74a paras. 3-7 IMAC).
IV. “Proceedings in criminal matters,” Art. 63 para. 3 IMAC
79 Art. 63 para. 3 IMAC lists examples of proceedings in “criminal matters” within the meaning of Art. 1 para. 3 IMAC in which minor mutual assistance may be provided. These include the prosecution of criminal offenses within the meaning of Art. 1 para. 3 IMAC (Art. 63 para. 3 lit. a IMAC), administrative measures against an offender (Art. 63 para. 3 lit. b IMAC), the enforcement of criminal judgments, pardons (Art. 63 para. 3 lit. c IMAC) and compensation for unjustified detention (Art. 63 para. 3 lit. d IMAC).
80 This is not an exhaustive list (“in particular”).
81 The term “proceedings in criminal matters” must be interpreted broadly. It may also include proceedings that are closely related to criminal proceedings. When determining whether proceedings are criminal in nature, the principle of mutual legal assistance must be taken into account, as the procedures and powers of the authorities in the requesting state may differ from those in Switzerland.
V. Recipients of minor mutual assistance, Art. 63 para. 4 IMAC
82 Minor mutual assistance in criminal matters, like international mutual assistance in criminal matters in general, is provided to foreign states.
83 Art. 63 para. 4 IMAC contains an exception to this rule. Minor mutual assistance may also be provided to the European Court of Human Rights. Further exceptions can be found in Art. 1 para. 3bis (mutual assistance to international courts or other inter- or supranational institutions with criminal jurisdiction) and para. 3ter IMAC (currently, on the basis of this provision: mutual assistance to the European Public Prosecutor's Office). The rules governing cooperation with the International Criminal Court are contained in a separate law.
VI. Mutual assistance to exonerate the person being prosecuted, Art. 63 para. 5 IMAC
84 According to Art. 63 para. 5 IMAC, minor mutual assistance may, exceptionally, also be provided even if the grounds for exclusion under Art. 3-5 IMAC apply, if it is intended to exonerate the person being prosecuted.
85 In more complex cases or where there is extensive evidence, it may be difficult or impossible for the requested authority to assess whether the legal assistance to be provided is actually exculpatory for the person being prosecuted. An additional problem is that the mutual legal assistance to be provided may potentially incriminate other persons and that the grounds for exclusion under Articles 3-5 IMAC may be circumvented by the transmission of evidence.
86 Both case law and literature point out that the provision must be applied restrictively; a potentially exonerating effect is not sufficient. The provision of mutual assistance under Art. 63 para. 5 IMAC should only be possible if the person being prosecuted consents. The exonerating effect of mutual assistance must be denied if the person being prosecuted expressly opposes the provision of mutual assistance.
87 Under IMAC, the provision of minor mutual assistance to exonerate the person being prosecuted is also permissible in certain other situations by way of exception. According to Art. 64 para. 2 lit a IMAC, the requirement of double criminality does not apply to such measures, and according to Art. 66 para. 2 IMAC, mutual assistance may be provided in such cases even if proceedings against the person being prosecuted are pending in Switzerland for the same offense.
Bibliography
Aepli Michael, Kommentierung zu Art. 74a IRSG, in: Niggli Marcel Alexander/Heimgartner Stefan (Hrsg.), Basler Kommentar, Internationales Strafrecht IRSG GwÜ, Basel 2015.
Bommer Felix/Goldschmidt Peter, Kommentierung zu Art. 266 StPO, in: Niggli Marcel Alexander/Heer Marianne/Wiprächtiger Hans (Hrsg.), Basler Kommentar Schweizerische Strafprozessordnung / Jugendstrafprozessordnung, 3. Aufl., Basel 2023.
Corminboeuf Harari Corinne, Kommentierung zu Art. 74 IRSG, in: Staffler Lukas/Ludwiczak Glassey Maria (Hrsg.), Onlinekommentar zum Bundesgesetz über internationale Rechtshilfe in Strafsachen – Version: 2.4.2024: https://onlinekommentar.ch/de/kommentare/irsg74, besucht am 7.7.2025, DOI: 10.17176/20240402-171818-0).
Dangubic Miro/Clerc Yves, Art. 80dbis IRSG – ein Überblick, forumpoenale 2022, S. 287−292.
Donatsch Andreas/Heimgartner Stefan/Simonek Madeleine, Internationale Rechtshilfe unter Einbezug der Amtshilfe im Steuerrecht, 3. Aufl., Zürich et al. 2024.
Eymann Stephanie, Die strafprozessuale Kontosperre, Basel 2009.
Eymann Stephanie, Kommentierung zu Art. 80n IRSG, in: Niggli Marcel Alexander/Heimgartner Stefan (Hrsg.), Basler Kommentar, Internationales Strafrecht IRSG GwÜ, Basel 2015.
Fabbri, Alberto/Furger, Andrea, Geheime Überwachungsmassnahmen in der internationalen Kooperation in Strafsachen: Ermittlungserfolg im Ausland versus Rechtsgüterschutz in der Schweiz?, ZStrR 2010, S. 394−416.
Frei, Lionel, Beschlagnahme und Einziehung als Rechtshilfemassnahmen, ZStrR 1988, S. 312 ff.
Giroud Sandrine/Aellen Louise, Kommentierung zu Art. 74a IRSG, in: Staffler Lukas/Ludwiczak Glassey Maria (Hrsg.), Onlinekommentar zum Bundesgesetz über internationale Rechtshilfe in Strafsachen – Version: 08.01.2025: https://onlinekommentar.ch/de/kommentare/irsg74a, besucht am 7.7.2025, DOI: 10.17176/20240402-171818-0).
Glutz Alexander M., Kommentierung zu Art. 9 IRSG, in: Niggli Marcel Alexander/Heimgartner Stefan (Hrsg.), Basler Kommentar, Internationales Strafrecht IRSG GwÜ, Basel 2015.
Godenzi Gunhild, Kommentierung zu Art. 144 StPO, in: Donatsch Andreas/Lieber Victor/Summers Sarah/Wohlers Wolfgang (Hrsg.), Kommentar zur Schweizerischen Strafprozessordnung StPO, 3. Aufl., Zürich 2020.
Graf Damian, Aspekte der strafprozessualen Siegelung, AJP 2017, S. 553−568.
Heimgartner Stefan, Kommentierung zu Art. 63 IRSG, in: Niggli Marcel Alexander/Heimgartner Stefan (Hrsg.), Basler Kommentar, Internationales Strafrecht IRSG GwÜ, Basel 2015.
Inglese Nicola, Das Beweisausforschungsverbot: Das Verbot sog. fishing expeditions und seine nationalen und grenzüberschreitenden Bezüge, Basel 2017.
Inglese Ramon, Teilnahme ausländischer Prozessbeteiligter am Verfahren der internationalen Rechtshilfe, Basel 2015.
Keller Andreas J., Kommentierung zu Art. 246 StPO, in: Donatsch Andreas/Lieber Victor/Summers Sarah/Wohlers Wolfgang (Hrsg.), Kommentar zur Schweizerischen Strafprozessordnung StPO, 3. Aufl., Zürich 2020.
Keller Andreas J., Kommentierung zu Art. 247 StPO, in: Donatsch Andreas/Lieber Victor/Summers Sarah/Wohlers Wolfgang (Hrsg.), Kommentar zur Schweizerischen Strafprozessordnung StPO, 3. Aufl., Zürich 2020.
Kuster Susanne/Mauro Raphaël, Aktuelle Herausforderungen der Beweisrechtshilfe, in: Breitenmoser Stephan/Ehrenzeller Bernhard (Hrsg.), Internationale Amts- und Rechtshilfe in Steuer- und Finanzmarktsachen, Zürich 2017, S. 43 ff.
Mieli Gaelle, Kommentierung zu Art. 1 IRSG, in: Staffler Lukas/Ludwiczak Glassey Maria (Hrsg.), Onlinekommentar zum Bundesgesetz über internationale Rechtshilfe in Strafsachen – Version: 08.09.2023: https://onlinekommentar.ch/de/kommentare/irsg1, besucht am 7.7.2025, DOI: 10.17176/20230908-105008-0).
Ludwiczak Maria, La proportionnalité en entraide internationale en matière pénale, AJP 2017, S. 608−612 (zit. Ludwiczak, La proportionnalité).
Ludwiczak Glassey Maria, Kommentierung zu Art. 63 IRSG, in: Ludwiczak Glassey, Maria/Moreillon, Laurent (Hrsg.), Petit Commentaire EIMP: Loi sur l’entraide pénale internationale, Basel 2024.
Ludwiczak Glassey Maria, Mesures de surveillance suisses et résultats obtenus à l’étranger, Remarques à propos de l’ATF 146 IV 36, forumpoenale 2020, S. 410−413 (zit. Ludwiczak Glassey, Mesures).
Riedo Christof/Fiolka Gerhard/Niggli Marcel Alexander, Strafprozessrecht sowie Rechtshilfe in Strafsachen, Basel 2011.
Stelzer-Wieckowska Marta, Die kleine Rechtshilfe in Strafsachen: grundrechtliche Stellung der betroffenen Person, Zürcher Studien zum Strafrecht Bd. 113, Zürich 2022.
Thormann Olivier/Brechbühl Beat, Kommentierung zu Art. 247 StPO, in: Niggli Marcel Alexander/Heer Marianne/Wiprächtiger Hans (Hrsg.), Basler Kommentar Schweizerische Strafprozessordnung / Jugendstrafprozessordnung, 3. Aufl., Basel 2023.
Thormann Olivier/Brechbühl Beat, Kommentierung zu Art. 248 StPO, in: Niggli Marcel Alexander/Heer Marianne/Wiprächtiger Hans (Hrsg.), Basler Kommentar Schweizerische Strafprozessordnung / Jugendstrafprozessordnung, 3. Aufl., Basel 2023.
Walder Jacqueline, In dubio pro dynamische Rechtshilfe? Die vorzeitige Übermittlung nach Art. 80dbis IRSG am Beispiel geheimer Überwachungsmassnahmen und ihre Vereinbarkeit mit dem Konventionsrecht, AJP 2024, S. 824−844.
Zimmermann Robert, La coopération judiciaire internationale en matière pénale, 6. Aufl., Bern 2024.
Materials
Botschaft des Bundesrates an die Bundesversammlung zu einem Bundesgesetz über internationale Rechtshilfe in Strafsachen und einem Bundesbeschluss über Vorbehalte zum Europäischen Auslieferungsübereinkommen vom 8.3.1976 BBl 1976 II 444, abrufbar unter https://www.fedlex.admin.ch/eli/fga/1976/2_444_430_443/de, besucht am 7.7.2025 (zit. Botschaft IRSG I).
Botschaft betreffend Änderung des Rechtshilfegesetzes und des Bundesgesetzes zum Staatsvertrag mit den USA über gegenseitige Rechtshilfe in Strafsachen sowie den Bundesbeschluss über einen Vorbehalt zum Europäischen Übereinkommen über die Rechtshilfe in Strafsachen, BBl 1995 III 1, abrufbar unter https://www.fedlex.admin.ch/eli/fga/1995/3_1_1_1/de, besucht am 7.7.2025 (zit. Botschaft IRSG II).
Bundesgesetz über die internationale Rechtshilfe in Strafsachen: Entwurf, BBl 1976 II 491, abrufbar unter https://www.fedlex.admin.ch/eli/fga/1976/2_444_430_443/de, besucht am 7.7.2025.
Die internationale Rechtshilfe in Strafsachen Wegleitung, 9. Aufl. 2009 (Rechtsprechung Stand Mai 2010) (zit. Wegleitung Rechtshilfe), abrufbar unter https://www.rhf.admin.ch/dam/rhf/de/data/strafrecht/wegleitungen/wegleitung-strafsachen-d.pdf, besucht am 7.7.2025.