Facts
The case concerns two main points
- The question of mitigation of sentence pursuant to Art. 64 last para. of the Swiss Criminal Code (SCC) due to the lapse of a relatively long time since the offense.
- The conviction of the appellant for perjury pursuant to Art. 307 SCC in two proceedings.
The facts can be summarized as follows
- Candid Mattmann and his son Adolf operated a pram factory and a metal finishing plant in Zug.
- In 1956, there were irregularities in the business, which ultimately led to the bankruptcy of the company.
- The appellant, Dr. Edmund Schnider, was involved in the events and was subsequently charged with fraud, fraudulent bankruptcy, and obtaining a false document.
- The criminal proceedings dragged on for many years, so that the ordinary statute of limitations of 10 years had almost expired when the judgment was handed down.
- The appellant was also convicted of perjury in two proceedings.
Considerations
Regarding the mitigation of sentence under Art. 64 last para. SCC, the Federal Supreme Court states the following:
- The provision is generally only applicable to offenses subject to the general statutes of limitations, not to those with shortened deadlines.
- The relevant statute of limitations is the ordinary one under Art. 70 SCC, not the absolute one under Art. 72 SCC.
- Only the individual's own conduct can be attributed…