Facts
The case concerns a lawyer ([H.]) who, in a criminal proceeding in Australia on behalf of his client (B.), attempted to undermine evidence by persuading a Swiss bank to issue confirmations of business transactions that did not accurately represent the actual facts. Furthermore, [H.] arranged for an employee ([S.]) to later testify as a witness before the Australian court in order to support the evidentiary value of the documents. This was done without the authorization of the competent authorities and was assessed by the High Court of the Canton of Zurich as a prohibited act for a foreign state pursuant to Art. 271 para. 1 of the Swiss Criminal Code.
Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court upheld the conviction of H. The decisive factor is that the interrogation of witnesses for judicial purposes is subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of authorities and officials under Swiss law. Even though [S.] himself could not exercise any coercive power, he performed an act reserved for state organs by clarifying the facts through his own questioning of witnesses in order to be able to…