Admission as a Private Plaintiff in a Criminal Proceeding for Violation of the Nature and Homeland Protection Act

Facts

The mountain cooperative [A.] purchased wood from [B.] , which still had to be felled and removed. The transport of the wood caused significant damage to the forest floor and to high and flat moor areas of national importance. The Public Prosecutor's Office of the Canton of Bern issued a penal order against [B.] for violating the Federal Act on the Protection of Nature and Homeland (NCHA). The mountain cooperative [A.] applied to be admitted as a private plaintiff in the proceedings, but this was rejected by the Regional Court. The High Court of the Canton of Bern confirmed this decision.

The mountain cooperative [A.] filed a complaint with the Federal Court and applied to be admitted as a private plaintiff in the proceedings. It argued that, as the owner of the damaged land, it had been directly infringed in its rights and therefore met the requirements for admission as a private plaintiff.

Considerations

The Federal Court examined whether the mountain cooperative [A.] met the requirements for admission as a private plaintiff. It found that the penal provisions of the NCHA exclusively protect public interests and that the mountain cooperative [A.] is not the holder of the legal interests protected or at least co-protected by the NCHA.

However, the Court came to the conclusion that there is genuine competition between the penal provisions of the NCHA and the offense of property damage (Art. 144 SCC). It found that the mountain cooperative [A.] , as the owner of the damaged land, had been directly infringed in its rights and therefore met the requirements for admission as a private plaintiff, if the offense of property damage was fulfilled.

The Court ruled that…