Facts
This decision concerns a criminal appeal filed by A., B., C., D., E., F. and their lawyer G. against a decision of the Criminal Appeals Authority of the Cantonal Court of Neuchâtel. This authority had prohibited lawyer G. from representing the six defendants in a criminal case for defamation and calumny.
The criminal complaint had been filed by the company H. Sàrl and its managing partner I. against the trade unionists A., B. and C., as well as their former employees D., E. and F. Lawyer G. had been appointed to defend the three trade unionists, and then the three former employees.
The Criminal Appeals Authority considered that there was a concrete risk of a conflict of interest in these proceedings, as the acts alleged against the two groups of defendants, although different, were related to the same issue concerning the wage practices of the complainant company. Therefore, the presence of a common representative did not allow for an adequate defence of the defendants.
Considerations
According to the Federal Tribunal, Art. 127 para. 3 CrimPC allows a lawyer to defend multiple defendants in the same criminal proceedings, but the professional rules of the FMLA require him to avoid any conflict of interest (Art. 12 let. c FMLA).
These rules aim to protect the interests of clients and to ensure the proper conduct of the proceedings. They are all the more important in criminal matters, as it cannot be excluded that a defendant may attempt to shift or diminish his guilt onto others.
The authority in charge of the proceedings rules ex officio and at any time on the capacity to act…