Article 22 cantonal courts
The cantonal prosecuting authorities and assess the crime of federal law, the reserved statutory exceptions.
Article 23 of the Federal judiciary in general
1 The federal jurisdiction following offenses of the Penal Code under:
a. the crime of the first and fourth title and Articles 140, 156, 189 and 190, provided that they compared internationally protected persons who are magistrates of the federal government, against members of the Federal Assembly, against the federal law, the Federal Prosecutor the Deputy Prosecutor or the Deputy Federal Public Prosecutor directed;
b. the crimes of Articles 137-141, 144, 160 and 172ter as they share the premises, archives and documents of diplomatic missions and consular posts;
c. the hostage-taking under Article 185 to the coercion of federal authorities or institution;
d. crimes and misdemeanors Articles 224-226ter;
e. the crimes and misdemeanors of the tenth title on metallic money, paper money and coins, official stamps and other signs of the covenant, weights and measures;
f. crimes and misdemeanors of the eleventh title if it is documents of the federal act, except tickets and receipts of the postal funds transfer,
g. the crimes of the twelfth Titelsbis;
is, the crime of Article 260bis and the thirteenth - fifteenth and seventeenth title if it against the federal government, the federal, against the will of the people in federal elections, voting, referendum, initiative or desire, against the federal power or against the federal justice are addressed;
i. the crimes and misdemeanors of the sixteenth Title;
j. the crimes of the eighteenth and nineteenth title if they were committed by a member or employee of the federal authorities or against the Union;
k. the violations of Articles 329-331; are
l. political crimes and offenses that are cause or consequence of riots , by an armed federal intervention is initiated. remain
2 contained in special federal laws provisions on the jurisdiction of the Federal Criminal reserved.
Article 24 federal jurisdiction in organized crime, terrorist financing and financial crime
1 The Federal jurisdiction are also criminal offenses under Articles 260ter, 260quinquies, 305 bis, 305 ter and 322ter-322septies StGB6 and the crimes that go criminal by an organization within the meaning of Article 260ter Criminal Code, when the offenses:
in a. a substantial part of foreign have been committed;
b. been committed in several cantons, while there is no clear focus in the canton.
2, crimes at the second and the eleventh edition of the Criminal Code of the Federal Prosecutor open an investigation if: a.
are satisfied the conditions in paragraph 1, and
b. Cantonal Prosecutor's Office does not deal with the matter, or the cantonal Law enforcement authority of federal prosecutors to take charge of the procedure calls.
3 The opening of an investigation justified under paragraph 2 of the Federal jurisdiction.
Article 25 Delegation to the cantons
1 The federal prosecutor, a criminal case, which is necessary for federal jurisdiction under Article 23, the cantonal authorities for investigation and assessment, only in exceptional cases transferred for evaluation. Except for criminal cases under Article 23, paragraph 1, point g.
are 2 In simple cases they can also be a criminal case, given for which federal jurisdiction under Article 24, is transferred to the cantonal authorities for investigation and assessment.
Article 26 Multiple jurisdiction
one has been committed the offense in several cantons or abroad or are perpetrators, perpetrators, co-perpetrators, accomplices, participants or subscribers is domiciled or habitually resident in different cantons, so
decide the prosecution of the covenant, which Canton investigated the criminal case and assessed.
2 Is a criminal case in both federal and cantonal jurisdiction of competent jurisdiction, then the prosecutor may order the Federal Association of the procedures in the hands of the federal or cantonal authorities.
3 An established pursuant to paragraph 2 jurisdiction remains even if the jurisdiction giving rise to part of the process is terminated.
4 If a delegation for the purposes of this chapter in question, are the prosecutors of the government and the cantons, the records available for inspection to each other. After the decision, the document will go to the authority that will investigate the matter and assess
added.
Article 27 responsibility for initial investigations
1 is given in one case, federal jurisdiction, the matter is urgent and the criminal authorities of the federation has not taken action, so the police investigation and the investigation be conducted
by the cantonal authorities, which would be under the jurisdiction rules territorial jurisdiction. The Prosecutor of the Federation is to focus immediately and the case is passed to it as soon as possible or to make the decision under Article 25 or 26
.
2 At crimes that were committed in whole or in part in several cantons and abroad and which have not the competence of the Federation or of a canton is established, the criminal conduct of the federal authorities first cases.
Article 28 conflicts
decide conflicts between the prosecution of federal and cantonal authorities, the Federal Criminal Court.
Articles 22-28 limit the jurisdiction between the cantons and the federal government in law enforcement and Assessment of offenses from. It was basically the previous rules, as in today's Criminal Code Article 336 - and 338 are in the Federal Law on the Criminal Justice (BSTP) contain adopted without material changes.
Article 22 contains the principle that the prosecution and adjudication of criminal offenses under federal legislation (particularly the Penal Code but also the addition of federal criminal law) the responsibility of the cantons (Article 338 of the Criminal Code so today with respect to offenses of the Penal Code).
Article 23 is one of those criminal acts that already were under conventional as the Federal criminal jurisdiction.
Article 24 lists those offenses that since the entry into force are the so-called efficiency bill on 1.1.2002 prosecuted and judged by the Bundesanwaltschft since 1.4.2004 as the date of its activities by the Federal Criminal Court in Bellinzona. Article 24 takes the present Article 337 of the Criminal Code. Differences will remain between those offenses which (under the conditions of subparagraphs a and b above.) Subject to mandatory federal jurisdiction (membership of a criminal organization, Art 260ter Criminal Code and the financing of terrorism, Article 260quinquies Criminal Code, money laundering, Art . 305bis StGB; Lack Sorgfalg in financial transactions, Article 305 ter of the Penal Code and the corruption offenses of Art 322ter - septies Penal Code and punishable acts, which by a criminal organization within the meaning of Article expect 260ter Criminal Code ') and the optional federal jurisdiction for financial losses and Urkundsdelikten (economic crime) under paragraph 2 on the other.
to federal jurisdiction in respect of offenses which proceed from a criminal organization that was at this point to refer BGE 133 IV 235 . According to this decision is against federal jurisdiction in cases in which Article of the Criminal Code does not 260ter is applicable, but there is a strong suspicion or was that criminal acts were committed by people who belong to an organization that meets the criteria of Article 260ter StGB . In this regard, subsidäre Nature of the article to note 260ter Criminal Code. This shall not apply if the exhaustion of the participation of the offender in a criminal organization in the Begeheung or participating in a specific crime, the commission of or participation in, the offender can be demonstrated. Article 337 of the Criminal Code should also be applied to such cases. In addition to the one adopted under federal jurisdiction must be made not later without distress in question exist, that the competence of the Federal Criminal Court, although results later that the criteria of Article 260ter respectively. the case-law developed are not met. An exception to justify the subsequent change in the jurisdiction would, would be only about before then, if the assumption of jurisdiction by the federal prosecutor in the investigations would have been manifestly unfair.
Article 25 takes the existing provisions of the Criminal Code respectively. BSTP with two exceptions. The Delegation of cases under Article 23 is the wording no longer limited to simple cases. In addition, the delegation of genocide (in this event are probably not simple cases anyway possible) excluded.
Article 26 also adopts the provisions of the present BSTP with the exception that the decision as to the District in the case of Section 1 for prosecution and authorizes verpflichet is only the Prosecutor of the Federation and not (also) the Federal Criminal Court has jurisdiction.
Article 27 Section 1 empowered to make the cantons in urgent cases in federal court investigation or investigative actions. According to Section 2 is also the federal government to carry out the first investigative actions authorized in cases where it is still no jurisdiction of a single canton or the federal government. It is intended primarily to cases of cross-border crime network (see FF, 2006, p. 1141). Unlike Section 1, paragraph 2, only speaks of action and not investigative actions.
corresponds to Article 28 of the present regime in BSTP.
0 comments:
Post a Comment