New edition of the trial of the century: No statute of limitations but double “discount” for Pierin Vincenz?

class = “sc-cffd1e67-0 iQNQmc”>

The striking rejection of the first instance decision by the high court against Pierin Vincenz (67) and other defendants reshuffles the cards in the trial of the century. According to labor law lawyer Peter V. Kunz from the University of Bern, dismissal cannot eliminate the interruption of the statute of limitations: “It is a long-standing practice of the Federal Court that the first instance decision interrupts the statute of limitations. .”

Kunz said that the Supreme Court’s decision to reject the first instance court decision in the Vincenz case did not change this. This practice is not without problems for the famous lawyer. “This creates a false incentive for prosecutors to seek first instance verdicts as quickly as possible for crimes threatened by the statute of limitations.” The quality of the indictment may fall by the wayside. Was it the same in the Vincenz case? Kunz does not want to give an opinion on this subject.

But he sees his assessment of the Zurich prosecutor’s office’s work confirmed years ago. After reading the 356-page indictment, Peter V. Kunz called it “talkative.” The Zurich Supreme Court issued a similar ruling this week, calling the indictment “unnecessarily excessive.”

Prosecutors can take forever

Interrupting the statute of limitations period may cause the process to be extended unnecessarily. Theoretically, it could take 20 years for prosecutors to reopen the case in district court. Kunz says that even if it takes “only” five years for the prosecutor to file a new case, the Federal Court probably cannot avoid citing the practice of interrupting the statute of limitations in the first instance.

But the most plausible scenario is for a new team of prosecutors to file a lawsuit within the next twelve months, possibly weakening some of the points. Kunz says the defendants around Pierin Vincenz can hope to get another “discount” at the next hearing. At the first hearing, their sentences were reduced due to the news published in the media.

In a second process, discounts may be added due to the long process and rejection of the transaction. Kunz believes Vincenz could get away with a suspended sentence if convicted again. “The former Raiffeisen boss could probably accept this situation as he has already reached retirement age,” he says.

Source :Blick