Facts
A criminal proceeding is pending before the Criminal Law Chamber of the Federal Criminal Court against Y. and other co-defendants for supporting or participating in a criminal organization and money laundering. After the initiation of the investigation, lawyer X. appeared as the private defence counsel for Y. and Z. With a legally binding order dated September 2, 2004, the Office of the Attorney General (OAG) did not allow the private defence counsel X. to continue due to conflicts of interest. The OAG then appointed lawyer A. as the court-appointed defence counsel for Y. Later, lawyer X. requested to be re-admitted as the requested private defence counsel for Y., which the President of the Criminal Law Chamber of the Federal Criminal Court rejected on December 19, 2008. Lawyer X. and Y. filed a complaint against this presidential order with the Federal Supreme Court.Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court examined whether the admissibility requirements of Art. 93 para. 1 lit. a BGG were fulfilled. It concluded that the non-admission of X. as the requested defence counsel could effectively impose an exclusive court-appointed defence on Y. and prevent the additional representation…