According to the decision published on Tuesday, it concerns the complaint of a young man who was in a pub in St. Gallen city center on Easter Sunday. It is said that he was not involved in rallies either as a participant or as an onlooker and did not give the impression of wanting to participate.
After the violent riots on Good Friday, the police took rigorous action on Easter Sunday to prevent further riots. According to the plaintiff, the bar was surrounded by numerous police officers in full gear. The police took the guests to a checkpoint without any explanation.
There he had to fill out a sheet and sign it. When he refused to sign, the police threatened him with arrest and told him to “shut up”. The young man was photographed against his will. Then he received a removal order from the city for 30 days.
Despite repeated inquiries from the plaintiff, the police did not give him any legal basis for their action. The plaintiff then went to the city police and complained. The police then canceled the eviction by email on April 9.
In his complaint, the man accuses the police officer, who is not known by name, of coercing him, falsely accusing him and behaving in an abusive and presumptuous manner. According to the Prosecution, “in particular the allegation of abuse of office must be examined more closely” in the criminal proceedings.
The Prosecution is critical of the evictions: The high number of 650 evictions appears “little differentiated and could be understood as an indication of deliberate expulsion in a row and without justified suspicion and thus possibly illegal evictions”. The police officers reported could have committed an abuse of office.
This should now be examined thoroughly and carefully in criminal proceedings. However, the authorization does not mean any prejudice against the officials or members of the authorities concerned. It is said that the presumption of innocence applies.
If the criminal proceedings reveal information about specific persons, a second authorization request must be submitted to the Prosecution Chamber. “Otherwise the public prosecutor’s office will have to stop the criminal proceedings against unknown persons.”