Facts
[A.] filed a criminal complaint against [B.] with the Public Prosecutor's Office in Bischofszell on 14 March 2013 for defamation, or alternatively, for calumny. He accused the latter of accusing him of lying in letters to the editor and damaging his reputation. The Public Prosecutor's Office decided on 23 April 2013 not to open an investigation.
The High Court of the Canton of Thurgau dismissed the appeal filed by [A.] against this decision on 25 July 2013.
Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court did not enter into the appeal of [A.] , as he was not entitled to appeal either as a private plaintiff or due to a violation of procedural rights. The appellant merely objected to the substantive reasoning of the contested decision, which is inadmissible.
However, the appeal against the cost decision of the High Court was partially upheld. The Federal Supreme Court stated that the appellant, as the losing party in the appeal proceedings, must bear the costs. The involvement of a lawyer by the respondent in the appeal proceedings was considered appropriate, as the latter, as…