In an appeal proceeding handled by LENLAW, the Federal Supreme Court lifted the electronic monitoring and movement restrictions imposed on a 77-year-old defendant after approximately 20 months. The petitioner was represented before the Federal Supreme Court by Stefan Lenz and Stefan Mbiyavanga.
The Federal Supreme Court found that, given the defendants’ age, their deteriorating health, and the duration of the measure to date, continuing this alternative measure was no longer proportionate.
The ruling shows that even an alternative measure that was originally permissible must remain necessary and reasonable throughout the entire criminal proceeding.
Approximately 20 months of electronically monitored confinement
Criminal proceedings are pending against the complainant in the Canton of Bern on suspicion of embezzlement and violation of the Federal Act on the Acquisition of Real Property by Persons Abroad.
Since November 2024, various alternative measures have been in place: a security deposit of CHF 100,000, a ban on leaving the country and on sending mail, and electronically monitored restrictions on movement. The measures have been extended several times.
Proportionality changes over time
The cantonal authorities continued to assess that there was a significant risk of flight. The High Court therefore continued to consider electronic monitoring necessary.
The Federal Supreme Court took a more nuanced view of the situation. It described the monitored confinement as a significant infringement on personal freedom.
No single factor was decisive in the proportionality assessment. Rather, the decisive factor was the combination of the complainant’s age, her deteriorating health, and the fact that the measure had now been in effect for approximately 20 months.
Taking these circumstances and the offenses under investigation into account, the Federal Supreme Court lifted the electronically monitored restriction.
The decision thus reaffirms an important principle regarding long-term interim measures: As proceedings drag on, it becomes necessary to reassess whether the nature and intensity of the interference are still justified.
Court Ruling and Media Report
Federal Supreme Court, Judgment 7B_833/2026 dated July 21, 2026
Regarding the Federal Supreme Court’s ruling
The Beobachter reported on the case under the headline “Federal Supreme Court Frees 77-Year-Old Woman from Electronic Monitoring.”