Rejection of the Imposition of Alternative Measures Instead of Pre-Trial Detention - Complainant Status of the Public Prosecutor's Office

Facts

The Public Prosecutor's Office of the Canton of Appenzell Innerrhoden is conducting a criminal investigation against A. and is requesting the Compulsory Measures Court at the District Court of Appenzell Innerrhoden to order various alternative measures instead of pre-trial detention, such as a contact ban, a restraining order, a weapons ban, as well as therapy and controlled alcohol abstinence. The Compulsory Measures Court does order some of the requested alternative measures, but rejects the imposition of therapy and controlled alcohol abstinence.

The Public Prosecutor's Office appeals this decision to the Cantonal Court of Appenzell Innerrhoden, which, however, does not enter into the appeal, as it denies the complainant status of the Public Prosecutor's Office.

Considerations

The Federal Supreme Court overturns the decision of the Cantonal Court and finds that the Public Prosecutor's Office is entitled to appeal the decision of the Compulsory Measures Court, by which it rejected the imposition of the alternative measures it had requested.

The Federal Supreme Court justifies this by stating that, according to the case law, the Public Prosecutor's Office is entitled to appeal decisions by which investigative or security detention is not ordered, not extended or revoked. This case law should also apply mutatis mutandis to alternative measures, as they can be so incisive that they hardly differ from investigative or…