Facts
Parties: Public Prosecutor's Office of the Canton of Zurich (Appellant) against X. and Y. (Appellees 1 and 2)
Courts: District Court of Zurich, Higher Court of the Canton of Zurich, Federal Supreme Court
Date: November 29, 2000
Main Allegation: X. is accused of having managed funds at the Swiss Bank Corporation (SBC) in Zurich that originated from illegal drug trafficking and of laundering these funds.
Background: In October 1978, X. established a customer relationship with the A.-B. couple, who were presumably leading drug traffickers. Until January 1990, funds were deposited and managed in accounts at the SBC. X. arranged for the disposal of assets belonging to the A.-B. family and received personal benefits derived from drug trafficking.
First Instance: The District Court of Zurich acquitted X. of the charge of money laundering but ordered him to pay a substitute amount. The Higher Court of the Canton of Zurich confirmed the acquittal but waived the substitute claim.
Appeal: The Public Prosecutor's Office of the Canton of Zurich files a federal appeal against the judgment of the Higher Court.
Considerations
Statute of Limitations of the Predicate Offense: Money laundering requires that the predicate offense has not yet lapsed at the time of the obstruction act. In the case of a predicate offense committed abroad, the foreign law is primarily applicable. The statute of limitations of the predicate offense is decisive for the seizure of assets and the prosecutability of money laundering.
Application of Foreign Law: The previous instance assumed that the predicate offense had lapsed under Swiss law. However, the Federal Supreme Court establishes that the predicate offense had not lapsed under American law. This is decisive, as the seizure of assets is also…