Facts
The complainant X. was subject to a contact and area ban until November 2, 2007, by the Zurich cantonal police based on the Zurich Protection from Domestic Violence Act (HSA/ZH) to protect his separated wife Y. X. filed a request for judicial review of the measures, which was rejected by the single judge in criminal matters of the Pfäffikon district court. Y. filed a request to extend the protection measures, which was extended by the single judge. X. appealed against the rulings of the investigating judge.
The Federal Court dismissed the appeals. It ruled that the protection measures neither constitute a deprivation of liberty within the meaning of Art. 5 ECHR and Art. 31 Cst. nor a criminal charge within the meaning of Art. 6 ECHR. The court found that the complainant was restricted in his freedom of movement by the imposition of protection measures, but this restriction was not so severe that it could be considered a deprivation of liberty.
Considerations
The Federal Court justified its decision by stating that the protection measures do not fall under the term "deprivation of liberty" within the meaning of Art. 5 ECHR and Art. 31 Cst. It stated that the measures are not so severe that they could be considered a deprivation of liberty, as the complainant could choose his place of residence freely and organize his daily life freely.
The court also ruled that the protection measures do not fall under the term "criminal charge" within the meaning of Art. 6 ECHR. It stated that the Zurich Protection from Domestic Violence Act is assigned to the area of public law and is not qualified as a criminal matter. The ordering of protection measures is not necessarily linked to the initiation of criminal proceedings.
The Federal Court also found that the complainant was restricted in his freedom of movement by the imposition of protection measures, but this restriction was not so…