312.0
STPOCPP
CH
CH
Art. 131 Schweizerische Strafprozessordnung (StPO) - Sicherstellung der notwendigen Verteidigung
StPO; 3. Titel: Parteien und andere Verfahrensbeteiligte; 4. Kapitel: Rechtsbeistand
Art. 131 StPO · Sicherstellung der notwendigen Verteidigung
Liegt ein Fall notwendiger Verteidigung vor, so achtet die Verfahrensleitung darauf, dass unverzüglich eine Verteidigung bestellt wird.
Sind die Voraussetzungen notwendiger Verteidigung bei Einleitung des Vorverfahrens erfüllt, so ist die Verteidigung vor der ersten Einvernahme sicherzustellen, welche die Staatsanwaltschaft oder in deren Auftrag die Polizei durchführt.
Wurden in Fällen, in denen die Verteidigung erkennbar notwendig gewesen wäre, Beweise erhoben, bevor eine Verteidigerin oder ein Verteidiger bestellt worden ist, so sind diese Beweise nur verwertbar, wenn die beschuldigte Person auf eine Wiederholung der Beweiserhebung verzichtet.
Gerichtsentscheide zu dieser Bestimmung (175)
51/2011/34 · sh (Art. 131 Abs. 2 StPO)
Admissibility of Pre-Code Interrogation Protocols and Statements in Police Reports
Cited in the reasoning to compare the requirement for securing necessary defense counsel in current law with past practice.
STBER.2017.27 · so (Art. 131 Abs. 3 StPO)
Forensic Report Inadmissibility Due to Lack of Timely Defense Counsel
Used to qualify the expert opinion as inadmissible evidence due to the lack of prior appointment of defense counsel in a case requiring mandatory defense.
BK 2013 362 · be (Art. 131 Abs. 3 i.V.m. Art. 141 Abs. 2 StPO)
Exclusion of Inadmissible Police Interrogation Protocols in Murder Inquiry
Used as a ground to declare the first interrogation inadmissible due to violation of mandatory defense requirements when the case was known to concern the accused.
BK 2013 362 · be (Art. 131 Abs. 3 i.V.m. Art. 141 Abs. 2 StPO)
Exclusion of Inadmissible Police Interrogation Protocols in Murder Inquiry
Used as a ground to declare the second interrogation inadmissible because mandatory defense was not secured after the investigation officially concerned the accused.
BP.2026.29 (Art. 131 cpv. 2 CPP)
Applicant's Attempt to Suspend Defense Attorney Revocation Denied
This article was mentioned by the prosecution regarding the risk of having to repeat investigative acts, but it was not explicitly cited in the final orders of the decision.
BP.2026.30 (Art. 131 al. 2 CPP)
Public Prosecutor's Revocation of Attorney Appointment Upheld in Appeal
Cited in the reasoning to justify the risk of having to repeat investigative acts if the appeal were successful, influencing the decision on suspensive effect.
BP.2026.31 (Art. 131 cpv. 2 CPP)
Prosecutor's Revocation of Defense Counsel's Admission Upheld Pending Appeal
This provision is implicitly referenced as a reason for the prosecution to avoid proceeding with investigative acts due to the risk of repetition, impacting the decision on suspensive effect.
BP.2026.32 (art. 131 cpv. 2 CPP)
Lawyer's Appeal for Suspensive Effect Denied in Money Laundering Case
This provision is mentioned as a reason why granting suspensive effect could hinder the investigation, as the Public Prosecutor's Office might hesitate to proceed with necessary investigative acts due to the risk of having to repeat them if the appeal is successful.
502 2025 146 · fr (Art. 131 Abs. 3 StPO)
Denial of Appointed Counsel for Economic Offenses Based on Anticipated Sentence
Cited in the reasoning regarding the applicants' challenge to the admissibility of evidence, although the challenge was rendered moot by the dismissal of the main request.
SBK.2025.96 · ag (Art. 131 Abs. 1 StPO)
Defendant's Mental Incapacity Voids Penalty Order
Requirement for the procedural authority to ensure that defense counsel is appointed without delay when necessary.
SBK.2025.96 · ag (Art. 131 Abs. 3 StPO)
Defendant's Mental Incapacity Voids Penalty Order
Rule on the inadmissibility of evidence obtained before a defense counsel was appointed, unless the accused waives its repetition.
P/4263/2025 · ge (Art. 131 al. 2 CPP)
Prosecutor's Refusal to Redact Police Interview Record Due to Lack of Mandatory Counsel After Forensic Order
Applied indirectly as the court found that the hearing conducted by the police on February 18, 2025, at 12:07, was not part of the preliminary investigation but rather a delegated hearing requiring mandatory defense, based on the opening of the instruction materializing at 3:55 AM.
470.2025.14 · bl (Art. 131 Abs. 1 StPO)
Inadmissible Evidence Due to Delayed Investigation and Lack of Appointed Counsel
Requires timely appointment of defense counsel when necessary defense is required.
470.2025.14 · bl (Art. 131 Abs. 2 StPO)
Inadmissible Evidence Due to Delayed Investigation and Lack of Appointed Counsel
Specifies that defense counsel must be appointed before the first interrogation when necessary.
470.2025.14 · bl (Art. 131 Abs. 3 StPO)
Inadmissible Evidence Due to Delayed Investigation and Lack of Appointed Counsel
Used to declare evidence inadmissible due to the lack of a necessary defense at the time of its collection.