Facts
The case concerns an individual, S., who was convicted of violating traffic rules by the Zofingen district court on 19 January 1989. The decision was confirmed by the Argovian cantonal court on 20 April 1989. S. then filed a constitutional complaint that was accepted by the Federal Court on 15 November 1989, which led to the annulment of the cantonal court's decision and the referral of the case for a new decision.
The cantonal court again convicted S. on 11 January 1990 for violating traffic rules, but S. filed two constitutional complaints for violation of his right to be heard, which were accepted by the Federal Court on 29 June 1990 and 22 October 1991.
On 19 August 1992, the cantonal court found S. guilty of violating traffic rules and confirmed the fine of 350 Swiss francs. S. filed a nullity complaint against this decision, requesting the annulment of the decision and the referral of the case for a new assessment.
Considerations
The Federal Court examined the question of whether the principle of expediency of the trial had been violated in this case. The principle of expediency of the trial is guaranteed by Article 6, paragraph 1, of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and by Article 4 of the Swiss Constitution.
The Federal Court decided that the question of whether the principle of expediency of the trial has been violated must be raised in the context of a constitutional complaint, as a direct violation of the Constitution or the ECHR. In contrast, the question of what the consequences of such a violation are on the interpretation and application of federal law is a matter of interpretation and application of the law…