Key legal question
Whether the appeal against the interlocutory refusal to change appointed counsel was admissible under Art. 93 BGG.
Extracted holding
The complaint was not admissible because the appellant did not show a non-reparable legal disadvantage.
Extracted reasoning
The challenged order was an interlocutory decision. The appellant merely criticized counsel's conduct and raised constitutional complaints, but did not demonstrate a legal disadvantage within the meaning of Art. 93(1)(a) BGG.