Supreme Court corrects Zurich district judge: Police officers have the right to a lawyer

Table of Contents

• 1 Police officers can also be victims of crime, especially when they work in non-peaceful law enforcement.
• 2 Police officers are not “average citizens”.
• 3 Involvement of lawyers “necessary and essential”
• 4 *​ Given the Supreme⁣ Court’s decision, what⁤ are the potential long-term consequences for access⁤ to legal representation ⁣for both police officers and private citizens involved‌ in similar‌ incidents?

The now 39-year-old social worker is considered a key figure in the anti-leftist revolutionary movement. He was convicted by the Zurich District Court in September 2023 for being marginalized in a peaceful “Black Lives Matter” demonstration. attack on the only black police officer on duty that day.

He is said to have hit the police officers in the head with a flag pole at the demonstration in June 2020 with full force. Before that, he is said to have attacked the head of the job, pushed him against a wall, rammed his elbow into his stomach and shouted “bull shit” and “piss off”.

The social worker was sentenced by district judges to a prison sentence of 9 months and a conditional fine of 150 daily rates of 80 francs each for multiple acts of violence and threats against authorities and officials and attempted simple physical harm, with a probationary period. of 4 years. He also had to pay 300 francs to a police officer as compensation.

Police officers are not “average citizens”.

In September 2023, the Zurich District Court also received a left-wing activist on charges of breach of peace and participation in an unauthorized assembly. The criminal proceedings for breaching the ban on concealment and taking part in an unauthorized assembly were stayed by the decision.

Despite the guilty verdict, two Zurich police officers’ claims for compensation for their legal fees were rejected by the Zurich District Court. One officer had applied for 5,092 francs, and the other 6,793 francs.

The district court justified the refusal by saying that the case “did not cause too many legal or factual problems” for the police officers who would be entitled to retain legal representation.

The district court said at the time that the legal questions to be asked of private plaintiffs were not particularly complicated. It should also be noted that the private plaintiffs are not “average citizens”, but two experienced police officers from the city of Zurich. The district judges argued that they probably knew what their rights and obligations were and how they could submit any claims for damages and compensation.

The two police officers appealed against the decision and applied again to the highest court to award the party compensation. The defendant initially filed a plea, but later withdrew it. The application process was conducted in writing without a court hearing. The Supreme Court has now published its ruling.

Involvement of lawyers “necessary and essential”

Taking into account all circumstances, the Second Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court believes that the involvement of lawyers is reasonable and necessary to protect the interests of private plaintiffs. The reasoning says, among other things, that just because the private complainants are police officers, they cannot be assumed to have knowledge of criminal matters.

Among other things, the police officers said that they had been working with the Zurich city police for years, but that they were working in the field of security and not as prosecutors. Moreover, they are involved in this process as victims and therefore they are also inexperienced. One police officer argued that the fact that he had been attacked in his daily work as a police officer hit him particularly hard, which is why it was up to him to have a legal representative involved for this purpose. .

In its decision, the highest court says that the district court’s arguments should not reinforce the need for legal representation, even if a lawyer is the injured party. Rather, private prosecutors cannot be easily expected to “anticipate and ask any additional important questions related to guilt, which may have a prejudicial character” or submit constructive requests for evidence.

The left-wing activist was therefore obliged to pay legal damages worth 11,885 francs to the private plaintiffs. In addition, he must also pay legal fees of 2,200 francs each to cover the appeal process and second court costs of 1,500 francs.

Judgment of SB240037 dated October 7, 2024, not yet final.