Facts
On May 26, 2020, eight unsuccessful asylum seekers, the Democratic Lawyers of Switzerland (DJS) and Solidarité sans frontières filed a criminal complaint against the Head of the Security Directorate of the Canton of Zurich and other representatives of the cantonal administration as well as ORS Service AG. They were accused of not or only insufficiently following the federal recommendations to contain the COVID-19 pandemic in the return centers of the Canton of Zurich in the spring of 2020, which exposed the persons in these centers to a direct, serious danger to life and limb. The public prosecutor's office concluded that the reported conduct did not constitute a criminal offense. It transferred the application for the initiation of an authorization procedure to lift the immunity of the Head of the Security Directorate to the Executive Committee of the Cantonal Council of Zurich. On November 5, 2020, it decided not to enter into the application, as it saw no reason to deviate from the assessment of the public prosecutor's office. The complainants filed a subsidiary constitutional appeal against this non-entry decision with the Federal Supreme Court. The Federal Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, insofar as it could be entered into.Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court stated that the exclusion ground of Art. 83 lit. e BGG, which excludes appeals against decisions on the refusal to authorize the prosecution of members of authorities, also applies to the present case. Although the authorization procedure is to be regarded as a matter of public law, as it represents a procedural requirement for the criminal proceedings, since it is a decision of the supreme cantonal authority, the appeal in public law matters is excluded.
However, the subsidiary constitutional appeal was admissible. Although the complainants as private informants and potential injured parties are not legitimized under the Cantonal Council Act, they are based on their procedural rights under the Federal Constitution and…