Baz moves on from federal court ruling
The Basler Zeitung (Baz) is defending itself against a journalist having to reveal the name of a cannabis dealer she reported on. The newspaper intends to challenge the Federal Court's ruling at the European Court of Human Rights.
This was reported on Friday by several media outlets, including the Baz itself. In October 2012, the journalist reported on a visit to a hashish user who resells some of his drugs under the title "Visiting a dealer". He told the journalist that he earned around 12,000 francs a year from this.
Qualified offense according to the Federal Supreme Court
The public prosecutor's office in Basel then initiated criminal proceedings. However, the journalist summoned as a witness invoked the right of journalists to refuse to testify. The Basel-Stadt Court of Appeal ruled in her favor. The Federal Supreme Court, however, upheld an appeal by the public prosecutor's office. If the annual profit from dealing in soft drugs such as hashish exceeds CHF 10,000, this constitutes a qualified violation of the Narcotics Act. This was the finding of the Federal Supreme Court in a decision announced on February 19. When it comes to the investigation of a serious criminal offense, the statutory right to source protection for journalists does not apply. In view of the specific circumstances, this omission was also proportionate. The interest in solving the crime was great. Meanwhile, the Baz could not invoke a notable public interest, such as if the report had uncovered serious grievances in politics, business or administration. Rather, the dealer had been given an advertising platform.
Baz sees source protection watered down
In his view, this ruling represents a violation of press freedom, said Baz company lawyer Martin Wagner in an interview in Friday's Baz. This is because it no longer guarantees the central protection of sources for journalists and contradicts an earlier Federal Supreme Court ruling from 2006. The protection of sources guaranteed in Switzerland can only be waived in exceptional cases - in the case of serious crimes. There is a list of exceptions for this. Beyond that, however, each individual case must be examined carefully. However, the dealer in the present case is "a small fish": according to Wagner, he probably made transactions amounting to a few thousand francs and bluffed to the journalist. The lawyer now fears that the courts will no longer examine the individual case following the new Federal Supreme Court ruling. According to Wagner, this would considerably water down the protection of sources. The Baz will therefore provide the journalist with an experienced criminal law expert who will take the judgment to Strasbourg. (SDA)
Image: Keystone
