Facts
{ "title": \"Seizure Ban of Objects and Documents from Traffic between the Accused and Journalists", \"facts": \"The Public Prosecutor's Office III of the Canton of Zurich is conducting a criminal proceeding against Christoph Blocher on suspicion of aiding and abetting and attempted inducement to violate bank secrecy. In the course of this proceeding, documents were secured and sealed at Christoph Blocher's premises. The public prosecutor's office requested the unsealing, which was partially approved by the Coercive Measures Court of the Higher Court of the Canton of Zurich. Christoph Blocher lodged a complaint against this decision and requested that the correspondence and records between him and certain journalists be separated from the secured material and handed over to him, as they are subject to the protection of media professionals' sources.
", \"reasoning": \"The Federal Court had to decide whether the correspondence and records between Christoph Blocher and the journalists fall under the seizure ban according to Art. 264 para. 1 lit. c CrimPC. The lower court had denied this, as the objects and documents were not located in the sphere of the journalists.
However, the Federal Court came to the conclusion that the seizure ban not only applies to objects and documents located with the journalist, but also to those located with the accused or with third parties. This is evident from the clear wording of Art. 264 para. 1 CrimPC, which explicitly states that the seizure ban applies "regardless of the location\" where the objects and documents are located.
The historical interpretation and the purpose of Art. 264 para. 1 lit. c CrimPC also speak against deviating from the wording. Source protection is an essential part of press freedom and is intended to enable journalists to protect their sources.…