Facts

The case concerns an individual, L., who intentionally set fire to the attics of five inhabited rental buildings that he knew were occupied. In five other similar cases, the fire lit by L. did not cause an arson. L. was sentenced to six years in prison and filed a nullity appeal with the Federal Court, which rejected his appeal insofar as it was admissible.

The key facts of the case are as follows

  • L. set fire to the attics of five inhabited rental buildings.
  • In five other cases, the fire did not cause an arson.
  • L. was sentenced to six years in prison.
  • L.'s nullity appeal was rejected by the Federal Court.

Considerations

The Federal Court's decision is based on the interpretation of Article 221 of the Swiss Criminal Code (SCC), which concerns arson. The court recalled that the notion of arson refers to a fire of such magnitude that it can no longer be extinguished by the person who lit it.

The court also emphasized that for the offense under Article 221 para. 1 SCC to be committed, it is not sufficient that the author intentionally caused a fire. It is also necessary that the author caused harm to others or created a collective danger. The notion of collective danger refers to a threat, even relatively indeterminate at the time of the act, to any legally protected interest.

The court further specified that if the author intended or accepted to…