Facts
The Federal Court had to rule on a complaint against a decision of the President of the Indictment Chamber of the Canton of St. Gallen of 11 July 2012. The complainants, [X.] , [Y. GmbH] and [Z. AG] , had filed a request with the Public Prosecutor's Office of the Canton of St. Gallen for the sealing of bank documents that had been edited in the context of a request for legal assistance from Liechtenstein. The Public Prosecutor's Office rejected the request, and the complainants appealed to the Indictment Chamber. The President of the Indictment Chamber rejected the application for provisional measures.
The complainants appealed to the Federal Court and requested the annulment of the contested decision. They argued that the Public Prosecutor's Office should have sealed the edited bank documents for the duration of the cantonal appeal proceedings.
Considerations
The Federal Court examined whether the lower court had rightly refused provisional legal protection. It found that the complainants, as holders of the affected bank accounts and indirect parties, were potentially entitled to sealing. The lower court had justified the refusal of provisional legal protection by stating that any claims for sealing would have to be asserted in the context of the evidence-gathering or legal assistance proceedings before the Liechtenstein authorities.
However, the Federal Court found that the complainants could only assert their rights against the edited bank documents after they had come into the hands…