Facts
This case involved a complaint against a decision of the Cantonal Court of Bern, in which the recusal request of the complainant [A.] against the composition of the Criminal Appeals Chamber was rejected.
[A.] had filed a criminal complaint against Dr. med. B. for issuing a false medical certificate, forgery, and possible additional offenses. The public prosecutor's office did not take up the proceedings, whereupon [A.] filed a complaint with the Cantonal Court. In his complaint, he claimed that he was rejecting the court in its current composition due to concerns about partiality.
The Cantonal Court dismissed the recusal request, whereupon [A.] filed a complaint with the Federal Court. The Federal Court dismissed the complaint.
Considerations
Pursuant to Art. 30 para. 1 Federal Constitution and Art. 6 para. 1 ECHR, every person is entitled to a lawfully established, competent, independent, and impartial court. The composition of the judicial panel must therefore be based on abstract, transparent criteria.
At the Cantonal Court of Bern, there are no detailed legal criteria for the composition of the judicial panel. Pursuant to Art. 44 para. 1 GSOG, the division president is responsible for the allocation of cases and the balancing of workload. The president of the Criminal Appeals Chamber composed the judicial panel based on the criterion of the availability of the judges, which is an objective criterion and…