Facts
The complainant [X.] was charged in May 1995 with fraud, obstruction of justice and other offenses. He was in pre-trial detention from May to June 1995 and again in August 1998. The Regional Public Prosecutor's Office of Berner Jura-Seeland partially discontinued the proceedings on January 31, 2011, and sentenced the complainant on February 1, 2011, in another proceeding to a fine of 180 daily rates, taking into account 147 days of pre-trial detention.
The complainant lodged a complaint against the discontinuation order and requested the reversal of the decision of the High Court of the Canton of Bern. The High Court dismissed the complaint, insofar as it was entertained.
The complainant now requests the reversal of the decision of the High Court and alleges a violation of the duty to provide reasons, the presumption of innocence, and the right to be heard.
Considerations
The Federal Court has dealt with the complainant's allegations and came to the following conclusion:
The lower court did not violate the duty to provide reasons, as it explained to the complainant why the deduction of pre-trial detention could take place in another proceeding. The reasoning allowed the complainant to understand the implications of the decision and to challenge it with full knowledge of the facts.
The presumption of innocence was not violated, as the alleged interplay between deduction and compensation is not based on the assumption that the complainant would be convicted. The question of compensation would only arise if the sentence were reduced or if a discontinuation of the proceedings or an acquittal were to occur, and as a result, a comprehensive deduction of pre-trial detention would no longer be possible.
The Federal Court also dismissed the…