Facts
In this case, it concerned a prohibition on disclosure that the Swiss Federal Prosecutor's Office had ordered against a bank in the context of an investigation for suspected money laundering. The bank had appealed against this prohibition, which was upheld by the Federal Criminal Court. The Federal Prosecutor's Office then appealed to the Federal Supreme Court.
The Federal Supreme Court concluded that the continued existence of the prohibition on disclosure was unconstitutional, as it represented a serious infringement of the bank's economic and communication freedoms and there was no sufficient legal basis for it. While a temporary prohibition on information to banks could generally be permissible in order not to jeopardize the investigations, in the present case the coercive measure had already been ordered for almost a year, without any time limit or revocation by the Federal Prosecutor's Office. However, such an indefinite, criminally sanctioned information barrier requires an explicit formal legal basis, which was not given here.
Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court stated that Swiss criminal procedure law does not know a comprehensive system of coercive procedural measures and that prohibitions on information to banks can generally be permissible in order not to jeopardize the investigations. However, such a coercive measure must be proportionate, which was not the case here.
The Federal Supreme Court considered the continued existence…