Facts
The complainant, [A.] , filed a criminal complaint against unknown persons with the Basel-Landschaft Public Prosecutor's Office on 17 January 2020 for attempted coercion, possible endangering of life and simple violation of traffic rules. The criminal complaint was based on an incident on 24 December 2019, in which a black combi with the license plate xxx sped past her as she was crossing the main road in front of her property in [U.] with her two dogs. The complainant was wearing a bodycam on her jacket and filmed the incident. The Public Prosecutor's Office did not initiate proceedings, and the complainant appealed against the decision not to initiate proceedings. The Basel-Landschaft Cantonal Court dismissed the appeal.
The complainant filed a criminal appeal and requested that the appeal be granted, the Cantonal Court's decision of 12 May 2020 be set aside, and the case be referred back to the Public Prosecutor's Office for the opening of a criminal investigation. She also requested free legal aid.
Considerations
The Federal Court examined the appeal and came to the conclusion that the complainant is not entitled to act as a private plaintiff, as she did not demonstrate that the statutory requirements for entitlement are met. The complainant claimed that as a result of the incident on 24 December 2019, she had to seek medical attention and was claiming compensation for the resulting financial damage as well as satisfaction.
The Federal Court found that satisfaction is only owed if the severity of the violation justifies it. Although the complainant claimed that the incident of 24 December 2019 had severe consequences, it is not sufficient that the consequences of the incident are severe from the perspective of the person affected. Rather, the violation of personality must also be objectively qualified as severe.
The Federal Court also examined the…