Facts
In the context of a complaint filed against the Debt Collection Office, the complainant X. requested the recusal of the majority of the members of the Debt Collection and Bankruptcy Chamber of the Cantonal Court. Three judges recused themselves or accepted their recusal, while three others contested it. On September 17, 2002, a tribunal composed of non-recused cantonal judges and substitutes rejected the requests for recusal targeting the latter. The complainant appealed this decision to the Debt Collection and Bankruptcy Chamber of the Federal Supreme Court.Considerations
The Debt Collection and Bankruptcy Chamber of the Federal Supreme Court ruled that the decision regarding a request for recusal is not subject to appeal to the Federal Supreme Court under Art. 19(1) DEBA. Indeed, this decision is not a decision of the (superior) cantonal supervisory authority ruling on conclusions made against a measure (or omission) of the debt collection or bankruptcy authorities. Furthermore, the decision concerning the recusal is an incidental decision, against which an appeal based on Art. 19 DEBA is not generally…