Facts
The Attorney General of the Canton of Bern filed a nullity appeal against the judgment of the High Court of the Canton of Bern, which had found [A.] guilty of a simple violation of the Narcotics Act. The Attorney General took the view that [A.] had committed a qualified violation under Art. 19 para. 2 lit. c NarcA, as he had acted commercially and achieved a large turnover. The Federal Court had to decide whether the turnover of CHF 78,000 achieved by [A.] over a period of three months is to be qualified as "large" within the meaning of the law and thus constitutes a qualified violation.Considerations
The Federal Court came to the following conclusion: - [A.] has obviously acted commercially by establishing, setting up and operating a retail business for the trade in cannabis products on a permanent basis. - The criterion of "large turnover" has an independent, limiting meaning for the qualification ground of commercial activity. In line with previous case law and literature, a turnover of CHF 100,000 or more is to be qualified as "large" within the meaning of Art. 19 para. 2 lit. c NarcA. The turnover of CHF 78,000 achieved by [A.] over a period of three months does not meet this criterion. - The period in which the turnover…