Facts
The case concerns a statement made by X., a police spokesperson, in a press release on 10 March 1995. The statement indicated that the group « Verein gegen Tierfabriken » (VgT) had claimed responsibility for attacks on stores. However, this statement was inaccurate, as it was actually the group « Tierbefreiungsfront » (TBF) that had claimed responsibility.
The VgT filed a criminal complaint against X. for abuse of authority and defamation. The criminal proceedings against X. were discontinued, as he had not acted intentionally. The VgT appealed this decision, requesting that the criminal proceedings against X. be continued for defamation.
The indictment chamber of the Bern Cantonal Court rejected the appeal. The VgT then filed a petition for annulment with the SCC.
Considerations
The SCC examined whether X.'s statement was justified by his duty of function as a police spokesperson. According to case law and doctrine, the justifying grounds of the penal code, in particular the duty of function, prevail over the proof of good faith.
The SCC considered that the conditions for the application of article 32 SCC were met, as X. had acted in the exercise of his functions, the statement was relevant and did not exceed the necessary limits. Even though the…