Facts
The Federal Supreme Court decided on an appeal against the decision of the Cantonal Court of Basel-Landschaft, Criminal Law Division, which had rejected the defendant's motion for recusal of the technical expert. The defendant, [A.] , was charged in a criminal case for negligent homicide due to an electric shock. The criminal court had commissioned a technical expert from the Swiss Federal Inspectorate for Heavy Current Installations ESTI to provide an expert opinion. The defendant later requested that the expert be declared biased and his findings be declared inadmissible. The Cantonal Court dismissed the motion for recusal. The defendant appealed against this decision to the Federal Supreme Court.Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court states that the grounds for recusal under Art. 56 of the Swiss Criminal Procedure Code (CPC) apply to experts. A ground for recusal exists if, upon objective consideration, there are circumstances that give rise to the appearance of bias or the risk of partiality of the expert. The defendant argued that the supplementary expert opinion of the expert dated November 20, 2012 was equivalent to a criminal complaint and the expert should therefore be considered as having been previously involved. Furthermore, methodological and substantive deficiencies in the expert opinion were indicative of the expert's bias. However, the Federal Supreme Court does not consider these arguments to be valid. The appointment of the expert, the expert opinion mandate, and…