Facts
On August 23, 2023, [A.] filed a criminal complaint with the Cantonal Investigation Office of St. Gallen against [B.] , the former head of the Buchs regional office of the St. Gallen Bankruptcy Office. [A.] accused [B.] of various criminal offenses in connection with the bankruptcy proceedings of [C. AG] , of which he was the chairman of the board of directors. The Altstätten Investigation Office forwarded the case to the Indictment Chamber of the Canton of St. Gallen, which decided on November 15, 2023, not to grant the authorization to open criminal proceedings against [B.] .Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court confirmed the decision of the Indictment Chamber. It stated that the granting of authorization requires a minimum level of indications of criminally relevant conduct. Not every administrative error justifies the obligation to grant authorization. Rather, an excess of competence or an abusive procedure must appear credible to a minimal extent, and there must be sufficient evidence of a criminal act. In the present case, the Federal Supreme Court did not consider these requirements to be fulfilled. It considered the criminal complaint filed by the opposing party [B.] against [A.] to be admissible, as [B.] as the head of the regional office of the Bankruptcy Office was…