Facts
The case concerns a conflict of competence between different cantons in the prosecution of an official offense. Hufschmid had filed a criminal complaint with the Interrogation Office of Nidwalden against Stähelin for false accusation. However, the Interrogation Office of Nidwalden dismissed the complaint, as it denied local jurisdiction, since Stähelin had filed the complaints on which the accusation was based in the cantons of Aargau and Solothurn.
Thereupon, Hufschmid applied to the Indictment Chamber of the Federal Supreme Court to instruct the Interrogation Office of Nidwalden to hear the criminal complaint against Stähelin, or alternatively to determine which canton is responsible for the prosecution.
Considerations
The Indictment Chamber states that Hufschmid as the complainant would generally be entitled to appeal to the Indictment Chamber if there was a negative conflict of competence between authorities of different cantons. However, this is not (at least initially) the case here, as only Nidwalden has taken a position on the issue of jurisdiction, but not the cantons of Aargau and Solothurn.
Nevertheless, the Interrogation Office of Nidwalden may not simply dismiss the matter, as it is an official offense. In such a case, the criminal authority with which the complaint is filed must ex officio contact the authorities of the canton which it considers competent in order to clarify the issue of jurisdiction.…