Nef case: Federal Court rules in favor of Beobachter and Weltwoche
The Federal Supreme Court has ruled in a landmark decision that the public has a right to know why the proceedings against former army chief Roland Nef were dropped. This ends more than two years of litigation in favor of Beobachter and Weltwoche.
Criminal proceedings were initiated against Nef in 2006 for coercion and other offenses against his ex-partner. The Zurich public prosecutor's office closed the investigation in October 2007 after the ex-girlfriend made a declaration of disinterest and Nef paid her compensation.
The publishers Axel Springer Schweiz and Weltwoche as well as two journalists from Beobachter and Weltwoche subsequently demanded to see the discontinuation order. The public prosecutor's office agreed, but was stopped by the senior public prosecutor's office. The Zurich Administrative Court then ordered the disclosure of the discontinuation order last May. The Federal Supreme Court has now dismissed Roland Nef's appeal against this. The judges in Lausanne referred to Article 30 of the Federal Constitution, which enshrines the principle of judicial publicity. This principle, which is central to the rule of law and democracy, must also be applied when proceedings are discontinued, as in the case of Roland Nef. In such cases, it is obvious that third parties may have information interests that are worthy of protection.
In this case, this interest arises from the media's control function. Firstly, the importance of the criminal proceedings against Roland Nef in connection with his election as head of the army. There is an important public interest in the alleged conduct of Nef that led to the criminal proceedings. It is also a matter of monitoring the judiciary and clarifying the background and circumstances of the discontinuation of the proceedings. In essence, the petitioners question the correct course of the investigation and raise the question of whether Nef may have been privileged due to his position. There is an important interest in clarifying these allegations. The purpose of making the decision public was precisely to counter speculation that certain persons were favored by the judiciary.
The publishers Axel Springer Schweiz and Weltwoche as well as two journalists from Beobachter and Weltwoche subsequently demanded to see the discontinuation order. The public prosecutor's office agreed, but was stopped by the senior public prosecutor's office. The Zurich Administrative Court then ordered the disclosure of the discontinuation order last May. The Federal Supreme Court has now dismissed Roland Nef's appeal against this. The judges in Lausanne referred to Article 30 of the Federal Constitution, which enshrines the principle of judicial publicity. This principle, which is central to the rule of law and democracy, must also be applied when proceedings are discontinued, as in the case of Roland Nef. In such cases, it is obvious that third parties may have information interests that are worthy of protection.
In this case, this interest arises from the media's control function. Firstly, the importance of the criminal proceedings against Roland Nef in connection with his election as head of the army. There is an important public interest in the alleged conduct of Nef that led to the criminal proceedings. It is also a matter of monitoring the judiciary and clarifying the background and circumstances of the discontinuation of the proceedings. In essence, the petitioners question the correct course of the investigation and raise the question of whether Nef may have been privileged due to his position. There is an important interest in clarifying these allegations. The purpose of making the decision public was precisely to counter speculation that certain persons were favored by the judiciary.








