Facts
[C.] and D. were arrested as part of an investigation into drug-related offenses, weapons, and a criminal organization. Both appointed lawyer [A.] as their defense counsel, but in his absence, lawyer [B.] from the same law firm stepped in. The Office of the Attorney General of the Confederation (MPC), considering the risk of collusion and conflict of interest, ordered the lawyers to communicate which accused they intended to represent, threatening the appointment of court-appointed defense counsel if necessary. Against this decision, [C.] and lawyers [A.] and [B.] filed an appeal with the Criminal Appeals Chamber of the Federal Criminal Court, which was dismissed. They then appealed this decision to the Federal Tribunal.Considerations
The Federal Tribunal declared the appeal inadmissible. It found that the decision of the Criminal Appeals Chamber, which upheld the MPC's order to exclude the joint defense of the two accused, does not constitute a coercive measure within the meaning of Art. 33 para. 3 let. a of the Federal Criminal Court Act (LTPF) and is therefore not subject to appeal to the Federal Tribunal.
According to case law, only decisions regarding serious measures that prejudice fundamental rights, such as pre-trial…