Facts
Parties: Appellant X. (accused person), Federal Prosecutor's Office, A. AG (private plaintiff)
Courts: Federal Criminal Court, Federal Supreme Court
Chronology:
- 1997-2007: X. is employed at A. AG and is obliged to maintain secrecy.
- 2006: X. sends emails with information about business secrets of A. AG to Y.
- 2007: A. AG files a criminal complaint against X. and Y. for violation of manufacturing or business secrets (Art. 162 SCC) and other offenses.
- 2007-2013: Investigation proceedings by the Federal Prosecutor's Office and the Federal Criminal Court, including the preparation of expert opinions and dismissals.
- 2013: Federal Criminal Court convicts X. of multiple violations of manufacturing or business secrets.
- 2013: X. files an appeal in criminal matters.
Main issue: Dismissal of the indictment to the public prosecutor's office for the supplementation of evidence and the examination of the accused.
Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court examines the dismissal of the indictment to the public prosecutor's office for the supplementation of evidence and the examination of the accused. It finds that such a dismissal is only exceptionally permissible if the indictment does not meet the requirements or the files are not properly prepared. The main task of taking evidence lies with the court, which must supplement new or incomplete evidence (Art. 343 CrimPC).
The lower court had referred the matter back to the Federal Prosecutor's Office to examine the accused regarding an expert opinion. However, the Federal Prosecutor's Office refrained from doing so. The Federal Supreme Court notes that the behavior of the lower court may seem contradictory, but it does not violate the law, as a dismissal for the supplementation of evidence is only exceptionally permissible.
The Federal Supreme Court emphasizes that the public prosecutor's office must conduct and fully complete the preliminary…