Federal Criminal Court, 11.11.2025, RR.2024.57
Facts
As part of an investigation into aggravated breach of trust and money laundering conducted against C., the Portuguese Public Prosecutor's Office submitted a request for mutual legal assistance to Switzerland. The Office of the Attorney General of Switzerland (OAG), responsible for execution, ordered the freezing of a bank account held by A., C.'s daughter. Subsequently, in its closing decision, the OAG ordered the handover of the documentation for this account to the Portuguese authorities and maintained the freezing of the assets.
A. appealed this decision, arguing that her account was not expressly covered by the mutual assistance request, which only targeted her father, C. She claims a violation of the principle of proportionality, noting that the Portuguese authorities had already received part of this documentation as part of a previous request in 2017 without taking any action on it.
Legal Analysis
The Federal Criminal Court reiterates the principles governing international mutual legal assistance in criminal matters, in particular the European Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters (ECMA) and the Federal Act on International Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters (IMAC).
It relies on the principle of proportionality (Art. 63 para. 1 IMAC), which grants the requesting State a wide margin of discretion regarding the usefulness of the requested information. Mutual assistance may only be refused if the measures are clearly unrelated to the offense. The Swiss executing authority must not go beyond the scope of the request, but it can and must interpret it reasonably, or even broadly, by acting proactively as if it were conducting the investigation itself.
This duty of exhaustiveness is guided by the principle of "potential utility": mutual assistance aims to uncover facts and evidence, even those whose existence the requesting authority does not suspect. It is therefore possible to transmit documents not explicitly mentioned in the request if they have a sufficient connection to the investigation.
Application to the specific case
The Appeals Chamber notes that the Portuguese request, although primarily targeting C., was formulated very broadly, requesting the seizure of "all funds deposited in bank accounts held by C. with Swiss banking institutions."
The court establishes a sufficient link between the appellant's (A.) account and the acts attributed to her father (C.). Indeed, this account was credited with 4 million euros from a company for which C. was the beneficial owner, a structure itself mentioned in the mutual assistance request. This link justifies a broad interpretation of the request by the OAG and the inclusion of the appellant's account in the mutual assistance measures, in accordance with its duty of proactivity.
Regarding the argument concerning the prior transmission of documents, the Court notes that the new request covers a much longer period (up to 2022, compared to August 2014 previously). It is up to the requesting authority, and not the OAG, to assess the usefulness of this additional documentation.
Finally, maintaining the seizure is deemed proportionate in view of the connection and the objective of the request, which aims to secure a claim of 399 million euros. The OAG therefore did not exceed its mandate.
Outcome
The appeal is dismissed. The OAG's decision ordering the handover of the bank documentation and the maintenance of the seizure is confirmed. The procedural costs are charged to the appellant.
Silex newsletter published in collaboration with Elisabetta Tizzoni
