Facts
Criminal proceedings are pending against [A.] in the Canton of Bern. At the beginning of the appeal proceedings, the Supreme Court of the Canton of Bern informed him of the composition of the court. [A.] then argued that he was challenging the court in its current composition due to concerns about partiality under Art. 56 lit. f CrimPC or due to a violation of Art. 6 ECHR. The Supreme Court did not enter into the motion for recusal and imposed the costs on the applicant's legal representative.
[A.] filed a criminal law appeal to the Federal Supreme Court and requested that the decision of the Supreme Court be set aside and the motion for recusal be granted. He also demanded that the matter be remanded to the lower instance so that it can decide anew with a composition based on the law, with the Supreme Court Judges Niklaus, Geiser and Kiener having to recuse themselves.
Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court dismissed the appeal. It stated that the applicant's motion for recusal was filed too late. According to Art. 58 para. 1 CrimPC, a motion for recusal must be filed without delay as soon as the party becomes aware of the grounds for recusal. The Supreme Court had already informed the applicant of the composition of the court on 31 May 2017 and 26 September 2017. The motion for recusal of 12 October 2017 was therefore too late.
The applicant's allegation that the Federal Supreme Court does not have a business distribution plan for the…