Facts
The case concerns a defamation lawsuit against Kurt Meier, who had accused the head of the municipal criminal police, Dr. Walter Hubatka, of payroll theft. Meier, who was a police officer himself and was later dismissed for breach of official secrecy, filed a complaint with the public prosecutor's office in 1968, in which he designated Hubatka as a suspect of payroll theft. The public prosecutor's office discontinued the proceedings against Hubatka due to lack of evidence. Meier later disseminated the suspicion against Hubatka again in a publication and a leaflet.
Hubatka subsequently filed a lawsuit for defamation against Meier. The jury court convicted Meier of defamation in 1974. Meier appealed, whereupon the Federal Court instructed the jury court to obtain additional evidence in Meier's favor and to re-evaluate the case. In a new judgment in 1975, Meier was again found guilty of defamation, but the sentence was reduced to 3 months' probation.
Considerations
In its judgment, the Federal Court addressed two central questions
1. Regarding the proof of truth The court made it clear that no separate proof of truth is required for the accusation. Rather, the decisive factor is the proof of the defamatory facts themselves, not the grounds for suspicion. The defense's view that proof of the truth of the grounds for suspicion is sufficient for the accusation was rejected.
2. Regarding the proof of good faith The court stated that the…