Maintaining the Account Freeze in the Presence of a First Instance Confiscation Decision

Facts

In this case, it was about an administrative court appeal against the maintenance of the account freeze of company [X.] at bank [C.] . Company [X.] had its account at bank [C.] in Switzerland, the assets of which had been blocked within the framework of a mutual legal assistance request from the Republic of the Philippines. The Federal Court had to decide whether the account freeze should be lifted or maintained after the Republic of the Philippines had submitted a first instance confiscation decision.

Considerations

The Federal Court concluded that the submitted first instance confiscation decision of the Philippine court (Sandiganbayan) meets the minimum requirements of Art. 74a of the Federal Act on International Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters (IMAC) and does not reveal any obvious violations of Swiss public policy or fundamental procedural principles. Therefore, the maintenance of the account freeze is justified as long as a final conclusion of the Philippine confiscation proceedings is still to be expected.

The Federal Court rejected the application of company [X.] for the release of EUR 20,000 to cover fee claims, as there is no legal basis for this. The claim…