Facts
Several individuals committed an armed robbery on January 2, 2016. In the course of the investigation, suspicions fell on the [E.] family and a French national named A. The Public Prosecutor's Office of the Republic and Canton of Geneva ordered the monitoring and recording of conversations in the visiting rooms of the Champ-Dollon prison, between the members of the [E.] family and [A.], in order to search for evidence of offenses related to the robbery. The Compulsory Measures Court authorized the use of the fortuitous discoveries concerning A.
[A.] contested the legality of these surveillance measures and the use of the fortuitous discoveries concerning him. The Criminal Appeals Chamber partially upheld his appeal, confirming the formal and substantive legality of the surveillance measure. [A.] then filed a criminal appeal to the DFC.
Considerations
The DFC dismissed the appeal. It considered that the prohibition on recording for evidentiary purposes the behavior of an accused person in detention (Art. 281 para. 3 let. a CrimPC) is primarily intended to protect the privacy of the accused person deprived of his freedom of movement. However, this protection does not extend to the visitors of the accused person in detention, or to persons at liberty who are implicated by the recordings made in the prison visiting room.
Indeed, a person accused at liberty may be subject to…