Facts
The complainant, father of a six-year-old daughter, applied for the opening of a criminal proceeding against the respondent, a member of the Child and Adult Protection Authority (KESB), for abuse of office. The complainant accused the respondent of having committed abuse of office by participating in the KESB's decision to reject his application for a change of guardian. The Indictment Chamber of the Canton of St. Gallen granted authorization to open a criminal proceeding against the visiting rights guardian, but refused it against the respondent.
The complainant applied for the reversal of the Indictment Chamber's decision and the granting of authorization to open a criminal proceeding against the respondent. The respondent and the Public Prosecutor's Office of the Canton of St. Gallen called for the dismissal of the complaint.
Considerations
The Federal Court examined whether the Indictment Chamber had rightly refused authorization to open a criminal proceeding against the respondent. It found that the respondent, as a member of the KESB, had a duty of care towards the complainant's daughter and the obligation to intervene, if necessary, to protect her interests against the actions of the guardian.
However, the Court concluded that there were no concrete indications that the respondent had acted intentionally and in breach of duty with the intention of supporting the guardian in the allegedly abusive measures taken against the complainant. There were also no indications that the respondent had knowingly tolerated any unlawful behavior by the…