PT
The Lisbon Court of Appeal Confirms: Suspects Have the Right to Information and Access to the Case File.
Press
|
in Advocatus
28 May 2025

The Lisbon Court of Appeal Confirms: Suspects Have the Right to Information and Access to the Case File.

The Lisbon Court of Appeal Confirms: Suspects Have the Right to Information and Access to the Case File.

At issue was the case of the companies that were repeatedly denied access to the proceedings in which they are under suspicion of having committed economic and financial crimes.

The Lisbon Court of Appeal recognized the right of suspects, who have not yet been formally named as defendants, to access the essential elements of the criminal case, “in the name of guaranteeing a fair and equitable trial.” This recognition arises from the direct application of Article 7 of Directive 2012/13/EU of the European Parliament and the Council.

According to the ruling of the Court of Appeal, Directive 2012/13/EU has direct effect, and the concept of “suspect,” as provided in the Directive, is not to be confused with or limited to the procedural status of “defendant” as defined under Portuguese law. Furthermore, the Court considers that the continued enforcement of restrictive measures over long periods, without effective adversarial proceedings and without access to the grounds for the decisions, violates the fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the European Convention on Human Rights.

The Court of Appeal also emphasized that the lack of notification and the denial of the right to consult the case file constitute a violation of the principle of adversarial proceedings and the equality of arms.

In this case, the Criminal Law team from Dower Law Firm was involved, represented by partner Nuno Sá Costa and associate Telma Vieira Barbosa.

“At issue was the case of the companies that were repeatedly denied access to the proceedings in which they are under suspicion of committing economic and financial crimes, including money laundering. Despite not having been formally constituted as defendants, the parties were subjected to severe restrictive measures — such as the freezing of bank accounts — for almost five years, without access to the grounds for those decisions,” the firm explains.