Facts
The complainant, Ms. [J.], had entered her own name as well as the names of her husband and son on a signature sheet for a federal popular initiative. The signatures were handwritten and legible, but had the same handwriting style. The municipal authorities of Wettingen discovered the inconsistency and initiated a criminal proceeding for election fraud. The High Court of the Canton of Aargau convicted Ms. [J.] of election fraud under Art. 282 para. 1 sec. 3 SCC and sentenced her to a conditionally commutable fine of CHF 50.
The complainant filed a petition for annulment and argued that the offense of Art. 282 SCC was only objectively fulfilled when the perpetrator had taken a precaution that was inherently capable of falsifying the result of the signature collection. She argued that her action could not be considered as falsification since the signatures of her family members were invalid and would be struck out by the competent control authorities upon discovery.
Considerations
The Federal Court dismissed the complaint and ruled that the complainant had exhibited behavior by entering the names of her family members in the signature list that was capable of impairing the correct formation of the popular will expressed by the initiative request. The court found that personal signing was a requirement for validity and that representation in the declaration of political will was not permitted.
The court referred to the case law and doctrine according to which the offense of Art. 282 para. 1 sec. 2 SCC also applies to anyone who signs the…