Facts
An appeal in criminal matters was filed against A. with the Office of the Attorney General of the Canton of Zurich. The issue was which requirements for the suspicion of an offence must be met for the imposition of coercive measures in the pre-trial proceedings and for pre-trial detention. The Federal Supreme Court had to decide whether the same high requirements for the suspicion of an offence apply to the unsealing of evidence in the pre-trial proceedings (Art. 197 para. 1 lit. b CrimPC) as for the imposition of pre-trial detention (Art. 221 para. 1 CrimPC). It concluded that the requirements for the suspicion of an offence for coercive measures in the pre-trial proceedings are less strict than for pre-trial detention.Considerations
For the imposition of coercive measures in the pre-trial proceedings, it is sufficient that there are substantial and concrete indications of a criminal offence. The coercive measures court does not have to conduct an exhaustive assessment of the evidence, but only to examine whether, based on the results of the investigation so far, there are sufficient concrete indications of a criminal offence and the involvement of the accused person in it.
For the imposition of pre-trial detention, on the other hand, a strong suspicion of an offence is required. For this, there must be concrete grounds for suspicion that the investigated conduct could, with a high…