Facts
A. and B. are accused of committing a total of 32 burglaries in six cantons. The first offense was committed on June 25, 2002 in the Canton of Nidwalden and reported there. Of the remaining offenses, 12 were committed in the Canton of Bern, nine in the Canton of Glarus, five in the Canton of St. Gallen, four in the Canton of Zurich, and one in the Canton of Lucerne. The authorities of the Cantons of St. Gallen, Nidwalden, and Bern could not agree on the jurisdiction for conducting the criminal proceedings.
Considerations
Pursuant to Art. 263 CCP, the statutory place of jurisdiction, which in the present case is in the Canton of Nidwalden, may exceptionally be deviated from if there are compelling reasons. In particular, considerations of expediency, economy, and procedural efficiency must be taken into account.
In the present case, 12 out of 32 offenses were committed in the Canton of Bern, which is only slightly more than one-third of all offenses. Therefore, there is no such predominance in the Canton of Bern that would justify a deviation from the statutory place of jurisdiction. Also, only a single offense was committed in the Canton of Nidwalden, so there is no predominance of criminal activity there either.
Further…