Facts

On 12 May 2023, the petitioners ([A. AG] , [B. GmbH] and [C.] S.A.), acting as creditor groups or their representatives of [D. GmbH] , filed a state liability petition with the Federal Department of Finance (FDF). They asserted claims for assets seized in Switzerland, the repatriation of which to the Republic of Uzbekistan had been decided by the Federal Council in May 2018. The FDF dismissed the petition by decision dated 6 September 2023.

The petitioners lodged an appeal with the Federal Administrative Court (A-5526/2023) on 10 October 2023. In a submission dated 13 June 2025, they filed a complaint for denial or delay of justice with the Federal Supreme Court against the Federal Administrative Court, seeking a finding of denial of justice regarding the blocking of funds in Geneva (USD 313 million or USD 487 million). The Federal Supreme Court dismissed the complaint by judgment 2C_330/2025 of 25 November 2025, to the extent it was admissible, as the interlocutory decision of the Federal Administrative Court was no longer independently appealable.

On 10 December 2025, the petitioners filed a petition for revision against judgment 2C_330/2025, seeking its annulment and the granting of their declaratory claims. By judgment 2F_30/2025 of 23 December 2025, the Federal Supreme Court did not enter into the petition for revision. On 13 January 2026, the petitioners submitted a letter invoking an additional ground for revision under Art. 121 lit. c FSCA. On 30 January 2026, they applied for the revision of judgment 2F_30/2025 and requested the recusal of the President of the IInd Public Law Division of the Federal Supreme Court.

Considerations

The Federal Supreme Court first examined the recusal request directed against the Division President and found that it had become moot, as the petition for revision had been decided without her involvement. It then addressed the grounds for revision invoked under Art. 121 lit. a and lit. c FSCA.

The petitioners argued that the Federal Supreme Court had overlooked their submission dated 13 January 2026, which had been filed after judgment 2F_30/2025 of 23 December 2025. The Federal Supreme Court explained that submissions received after the decision may no longer be taken into account. Therefore, no ground for revision existed under Art. 121 lit. c FSCA, as the submission could no longer be included in the proceedings. Moreover, the submission did not contain any new, material facts relevant to revision that would have required consideration.

The petitioners further complained that the Federal Supreme Court had changed its practice in judgment 2C_330/2025 of 25 November 2025 without holding a coordination conference under Art. 23 FSCA or a decision by a five-judge panel under…