This cruel murder shocked the Switzerland: in 2013, Claude Dubois had kidnapped the young Marie (†19) in a forest in Châtonnaye FR, where he strangled her, the vicar’s daughter on for hours, tortured, and finally with a belt. Dubois was sentenced and held in custody.

Particularly shocking: Dubois a remainder of the sentence served at the time of the fact in house arrest. Because he had already murdered before. In 1998, Dubois had raped his former girlfriend and killed. He could kill Marie, only because the justice wanted him to rehabilitate in house arrest.

another victory for Natalie Rickli

In the case of such acts shall be liable to the state now. The called for the former SVP national councillor, and today’s Zurich councillor Natalie Rickli (42) and the national Council has decided to implement.

The law Commission, both councils had Ricklis proposal already approved earlier. The national Council Commission worked out a draft law and sent it to the consultation. The design joined but a broad refusal. The Commission therefore decided to continue with the project.

In the national Council, the majority saw it differently. You will find that the state is morally responsible. If the authorities and the judge decided that the offender could be released, then you would have to take responsibility.

Today the state is not liable

Today, the Confederation or the cantons are liable generally for damages to the state caused employees in the exercise of their official duties. A prerequisite is that a tort has led to the violation of an official duty to do so. The easing of the penal system, or a conditional dismissal pursuant to Federal court, however, no tort, just because you turn out to be false.

to be changed. The law Commission has proposed a state liability regardless of fault and tort attack. The determination in the case of serious and dangerous crimes committed in the context of a prison opening is to come.

vote

In the consultation were all participating in the 25 cantons against the template. Also, the FDP, GLP and the SP rejected the draft law.

From the point of view of the opponents and enemies of the state could act as a liability to be counterproductive: It is expected that in the future, there is very little enforcement would be openings granted, they argue. Offenders would be dismissed so unprepared from prison, which increases the risk of relapse. The consultation participants held numerous other objections to the field. Some moved to the constitutionality in doubt. (SDA/sf)