Requirements for Reasoning in Detention Ordered by the Court of Appeal

Facts

In this case, the FSCA examined the requirements for reasoning in the decision to order immediate arrest and detention for safety reasons, made by the Criminal Court of Appeal of the Cantonal Court of Vaud in its judgment on appeal. The appellant, A., had been sentenced on appeal to a custodial sentence of 40 months for sexual coercion, rape and violation of the Federal Act on Foreign Nationals. The Criminal Court of Appeal had also ordered his immediate arrest and detention for safety reasons, but without providing written reasoning for this decision initially.

Considerations

The FSCA considered that the detention order, although made by the appellate court in corpore, had to meet the requirements for reasoning set out in Art. 226(2) CrimPC, applicable by analogy. According to case law, the judge is required to provide reasoning for their decisions, so that the litigant can understand them and exercise their right of appeal properly. Even if a concise reasoning is permitted, the judge must at least briefly mention the grounds that guided them and on which they based their decision.

In the present case, the FSCA considered that the mere mention in the minutes of the appeal hearing that detention was ordered "due to the appellant's insufficient ties to Switzerland" did not constitute sufficient reasoning. The appellant was in fact detained for more than three weeks without receiving written reasoning for this measure,…