No right of veto for private plaintiffs in abbreviated proceedings
Published: Monday, Dec 23rd 2024, 13:10
Back to Live Feed
The private plaintiff has no absolute right of veto with regard to the conviction of the perpetrator in summary proceedings. The Federal Supreme Court dismissed the appeal of two people who were physically assaulted outside a discotheque in Crans Montana VS in 2014.
The victims had filed a complaint for simple assault. One of the perpetrators applied for summary proceedings on his own behalf.
He accepted the indictment subsequently submitted to him by the public prosecutor's office for simple assault and other offenses. He was sentenced in summary proceedings to 22 months' conditional imprisonment.
Two of the victims appealed against this verdict to the Valais cantonal court. They demanded that the public prosecutor's office conduct ordinary criminal proceedings. The cantonal court dismissed their appeal. They then appealed to the Federal Supreme Court, which also dismissed their appeal, as can be seen from the ruling published on Monday.
According to the Federal Code of Criminal Procedure, summary proceedings can be conducted if the perpetrator basically admits to the facts of the case. The public prosecutor's office conducts ordinary criminal proceedings if one party rejects the indictment.
Own rights only
An interpretation shows that the private plaintiff's rejection of the indictment can only relate to aspects that affect their own rights. This relates in particular to their civil claims or the criminal offenses charged. However, private plaintiffs have no right of appeal either with regard to the sentence or the conduct of the summary proceedings as such.
In the specific case, the complainants argue that the offender should have been judged in ordinary proceedings and punished more severely. However, they neither assert civil claims nor dispute the qualification of the offenses. (Judgment 6B_170/2024) of December 23)
©Keystone/SDA
English 
German 
French 
Spanish 
Arabic