Jurisdiction of the Courts for Customs Offences

Facts

Zobrist, residing in Dietikon (Canton of Zurich), travelled to Germany with his VW bus on 17 January 1963. There, he had the damaged engine replaced with that of a scrap vehicle of the same type. Upon returning through the Customs Office Bargen (Canton of Schaffhausen) into Switzerland, he did not declare the engine acquired in Germany and installed in his vehicle for customs clearance. Consequently, the Federal Customs Directorate fined him for evasion of import duties and turnover tax. When the enforcement led to a certificate of loss, the Directorate of Customs District II applied to the District Court of Zurich to convert the uncollectible fine of CHF 312.-- into 31 days of imprisonment.

Considerations

The District Court of Zurich and the Zurich Cantonal Court declined to hear the case, as the courts of the Canton of Schaffhausen, where the offence was committed, had jurisdiction. The Federal Prosecutor's Office then filed a nullity appeal.

The Indictment Chamber of the Federal Supreme Court decided that Art. 264 of the Federal Act on the Administration of Federal Criminal Justice (FCJA) as a special provision takes precedence over Art. 268 FCJA and applies to all disputes in criminal matters of federal law relating to the intercantonal place of jurisdiction. Therefore, a legal remedy for violation of federal jurisdictional provisions is excluded as long as the Indictment Chamber can be appealed to.

Furthermore, the Indictment Chamber stated that for offences against fiscal federal laws such as the Customs Act (CustA) and the Turnover Tax Decree (TTD), the special regulation in Art. 96 para. 2 CustA and Art. 53…