Facts
The appellant [X.] was convicted by the High Court of the Canton of Zurich for a qualified violation of the Narcotics Act. He filed a complaint with the Federal Supreme Court. The Federal Supreme Court partially overturned the judgment of the High Court and remanded the case for a new assessment by the lower court. The decisive factor was that the undercover agent "[C.] " was not questioned by the court itself, but only by the public prosecutor's office within the framework of an indirect confrontation. The Federal Supreme Court made it clear that in the case of statements by undercover agents, there must be an interrogation by the court within the framework of an indirect confrontation in order to verify the credibility of the statements and to compensate for the curtailment of the defendant's rights of defense.Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court stated that the statements of undercover agents are not only relevant for the question of the defendant's criminal liability, but also for the assessment of whether the undercover agent has exceeded the permissible limits. Therefore, the defendant has an absolute right to have undercover agents questioned by a court within the framework of an indirect confrontation. Since the lower court had not questioned the undercover agent…