Legislator Case Law & Legislation
21 04 273 • KG LU 21 04 273 AI generated

Magistrate Disqualification in Investigation Following Detention Order Upheld

Case Number 21 04 273
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Switzerland · Canton of Lucerne (CH-LU)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Court Costs Borne by appellant

Legislator summary

AI generated

The appellate court dismissed a challenge seeking to disqualify the magistrate conducting an investigation, even though that same magistrate had previously ordered the accused's detention, holding that such a personal union only affects the legality of the detention order under Article 5 ECHR, not the validity of subsequent investigative acts. The court reasoned that the standards of independence required for a judge ordering detention do not extend to the investigating magistrate, as the latter's role inherently involves a degree of partiality akin to that of a prosecutor, and relevant domestic law specifically prevents the investigating magistrate who ordered custody from also filing the indictment, thereby separating the roles as required by constitutional and treaty provisions. Furthermore, the court rejected the claim of a violation of the right to be heard because the opposing party's non-substantive submissions were not a decisive factor in the prosecutor's decision, and the procedural error regarding where the challenge was initially filed did not constitute a breach.

Legislator headnote

Official

Art. 5 Ziff. 3 EMRK; Art. 29 Abs. 2 und 31 Abs. 3 BV; §§ 30 Abs. 1 Ziff. 4 und 261 Abs. 1 Ziff. 1 StPO; § 1 Abs. 1 und Abs. 2 der Verordnung betreffend die Anordnung von Untersuchungshaft und die Anklageerhebung in Strafverfahren. Der die Untersuchung leitende Amtsstatthalter kann vom Angeschuldigten nicht wegen Befangenheit abgelehnt werden, auch wenn dieser zuvor die Haft gegen den Angeschuldigten angeordnet hatte; rechtliches Gehör. | Strafprozessrecht

Keywords

AI generated
investigating magistrate right to be heard violation of procedural rights indictment decision opposing counsel disqualification proceedings

Cited Legislation

AI generated

Cited Case Law

AI generated
AI generated

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
Art. 5 Ziff. 3 EMRK

Cited in the decision summary/heading, relating to the impartiality required for the judge ordering custody.

Art. 29 Abs. 2

Cited in the decision summary/heading, relating to the right to be heard (legal counsel).

Art. 31 Abs. 3 BV

Cited in the decision summary/heading, relating to the requirement of an independent authority for detention.

§§ 30 Abs. 1 Ziff. 4 StPO

Cited in the decision summary/heading, related to grounds for challenging a judge.

§ 261 Abs. 1 Ziff. 1 StPO

Cited in the decision summary/heading, specifying the ground for appeal based on a breach of law (used to examine the claim).

§ 1 Abs. 1 der Verordnung betreffend die Anordnung von Untersuchungshaft und die Anklageerhebung in Strafverfahren

Cited in the decision summary/heading, governing the allocation of duties between the investigating magistrate and the prosecutor after detention is ordered.

§ 1 Abs. 2 der Verordnung betreffend die Anordnung von Untersuchungshaft und die Anklageerhebung in Strafverfahren

Cited in the decision summary/heading, governing which authority files the indictment.

Need to analyze how this precedent applies to your matter?

Cross-reference this judgment against statutes, commentaries, and subsequent citing case law inside Legislator AI.

Open in Legislator →

Full text

Rechtsprechung Luzern

Instanz: · Obergericht

Abteilung: · II. Kammer

Rechtsgebiet: · Strafprozessrecht

Entscheiddatum: · 25.01.2005

Fallnummer: · 21 04 273

LGVE: · 2005 I Nr. 58

Leitsatz: · Art. 5 Ziff. 3 EMRK; Art. 29 Abs. 2 und 31 Abs. 3 BV; §§ 30 Abs. 1 Ziff. 4 und 261 Abs. 1 Ziff. 1 StPO; § 1 Abs. 1 und Abs. 2 der Verordnung betreffend die Anordnung von Untersuchungshaft und die Anklageerhebung in Strafverfahren. Der die Untersuchung leitende Amtsstatthalter kann vom Angeschuldigten nicht wegen Befangenheit abgelehnt werden, auch wenn dieser zuvor die Haft gegen den Angeschuldigten angeordnet hatte; rechtliches Gehör.

Rechtskraft: · Diese Entscheidung ist rechtskräftig.