Facts
The appellant, [A.] , was the owner of an independent dental practice and received a locally and temporarily limited exception permit for independent professional practice as a dentist in 1991 and an unlimited exception permit in 1996. In 2012, disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him, which ultimately led to the withdrawal of his professional practice permit. After a favorable decision by the Administrative Court of the Canton of St. Gallen, the professional practice permit was re-issued to him.
During the disciplinary proceedings, the then Secretary General of the Health Department, [B.] , and the then head of the legal service, [C.] , provided information about [A.] to a media company. [A.] filed a criminal complaint against [B.] and [C.] for alleged violation of official secrecy. In the context of the criminal proceedings, [C.] was released from official secrecy in order to allow him to express himself in the proceedings.
[A.] appealed against the release declaration, which was rejected by the Administrative Court of the Canton of St. Gallen. The Administrative Court found that the release declaration was not a challengeable disposition and [A.] was not entitled to appeal.
Considerations
The Federal Court examined whether the lower court had rightly not entertained the appeal. It found that the release declaration from official secrecy has an internal administrative effect and primarily serves the exercise of party and defense rights in the authorization and criminal proceedings. Third parties are not authorized to file a release application or lodge an objection against it.
The Federal Court found that the appellant was not affected by the release declaration and therefore did not have a…