Facts
Parties: Appellant A. against respondents Daniel Peyer and Silvio Knecht.
Court: Federal Supreme Court, I. Public Law Division.
Date: March 3, 2022.
Main issue: Motion for recusal due to bias resulting from multiple involvement in criminal proceedings.
Facts:
- On July 25, 2019, the public prosecutor's office of the canton of Aargau filed an indictment against A. for attempted fraud, forgery, and embezzlement.
- A penal order was issued, against which A. filed an objection.
- On March 18, 2020, an additional indictment followed.
- The president of the district court, Daniel Peyer, referred the indictment to the district court and merged the proceedings.
- A. applied for the recusal of Daniel Peyer and Silvio Knecht.
- The cantonal court of Aargau dismissed the motions for recusal.
- A. filed an appeal in criminal matters with the Federal Supreme Court.
Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court examined the motions for recusal against Daniel Peyer and Silvio Knecht. It noted that the lower court dismissed the motion for recusal against Werner Kummer as moot, as he had left office. The appellant disputed the impartiality of the respondents.
According to Art. 56 lit. f CrimPC, a person acting in a criminal authority must recuse themselves if they might be biased for other reasons, in particular due to friendship or enmity with a party or their legal representative. Case law assumes prejudice and bias if circumstances exist that are suitable to arouse mistrust in the impartiality of the judge. In this context, it is not the subjective feeling of a party that is decisive, but it must appear objectively justified.
The appellant argued that the respondents had participated in the failed abbreviated procedure and therefore could not act as judges in the ordinary procedure. The lower court considered the submissions regarding Daniel Peyer to be tardy, but not those regarding Silvio Knecht. The Federal Supreme Court found that multiple involvement does…