Facts
In this judgment, the Federal Supreme Court dealt with the question of whether the use of an undercover agent in the context of a simulated drug purchase meets the requirements of the Federal Act on Covert Investigations (BVE). The appellant, who had been convicted of a violation of the Narcotics Act, argued that the use of the police officer as a simulated buyer should be classified as a covert investigation within the meaning of the BVE and is therefore inadmissible, as the required judicial authorization was lacking.
The lower court held that the present simulated drug purchase does not qualify as a covert investigation within the meaning of the BVE and is therefore informally admissible. However, the Federal Supreme Court concluded that the use of the police officer constitutes a covert investigation within the meaning of the BVE and therefore the scope of application of this Act is fulfilled.
The Federal Supreme Court upheld its previous case law, according to which any establishment of contacts with a suspicious person for investigative purposes by a police officer not recognizable as such, regardless of the degree of deception and the intensity of the intervention, is to be classified as a covert investigation within the meaning of the BVE. Since the required judicial authorization was lacking in the present case, the information obtained is not admissible as evidence according to the BVE.
Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court stated that the police officer "SK 168" by his actions of going to the music store and telling the appellant that he wanted to buy something to smoke, had established contacts in the sense of an active, targeted behavior, the purpose of which was to detect and prove a specific violation of the Narcotics Act that the target person was still to commit. This constitutes a covert…