Facts

Parties:

  • Appellant: [A.]
  • Respondent: Public Prosecutor's Office of Kreuzlingen

Facts:

  • The Public Prosecutor's Office of Kreuzlingen is conducting a criminal investigation against [A.] and [B.] for intentional homicide.
  • [B.] applies for an abbreviated procedure, which is approved by the Public Prosecutor's Office.
  • The Public Prosecutor's Office separates the proceedings against [B.] from those against [A.] .
  • [A.] files an appeal against the separation of proceedings with the Higher Court of the Canton of Thurgau.
  • The Higher Court dismisses the appeal as inadmissible since the indictment has already been filed.
  • [A.] files an appeal in criminal matters with the Federal Supreme Court.

Considerations

The Federal Supreme Court first examines the admissibility of the appeal. Pursuant to Art. 78 para. 1 FSCA, the appeal in criminal matters is admissible. The previous instance did not rule on the appeals 2 and 3, which the appellant does not contest. With regard to appeal 1, the previous instance dismissed the appeal as inadmissible, which the appellant challenges as a violation of federal law.

The Federal Supreme Court finds that the decision of the previous instance is an independent interlocutory decision on jurisdiction. Pursuant to Art. 92 FSCA, appeals are admissible against such decisions. The separation of proceedings results in a change of jurisdiction, as two different panels must deal with the homicide. This corresponds to the purpose and intent of Art. 92 FSCA, which provides for a rapid and preliminary decision on jurisdiction.

The Federal Supreme Court affirms an irreparable disadvantage within the meaning of Art. 93 para. 1 lit. a FSCA. The final judgment against [B.] could disadvantage the appellant, as [B.] could incriminate him and testify as a…