contents
The former head of the sports department distributed 1.8 million francs on his own initiative, partly for his own benefit.
The bottom line was that it was an impressive sum that the former head of the sports department in the canton of Schwyz had embezzled over the years: 1.8 million francs. The man had diverted the money from the lottery fund between 2005 and 2014 and transferred it to a special account, over which in fact only he had the power of attorney.
He thus determined at his own discretion who received sports funding in the canton of Schwyz. The cadre officer was not primarily interested in personal enrichment. Most of the money actually went to athletes. Some 10,000 francs went to him, for example to finance his car.
From acquittal to overly severe judgment
These facts were undisputed by all court instances, and the Federal Supreme Court has now confirmed them. However: The courts were absolutely divided on the question of how serious the offense of the former chief official weighed.
The Schwyz criminal court acquitted him three years ago. He could have assumed that he had acted lawfully. A year later, the second instance, the cantonal court, saw things quite differently: This sentenced the man to a prison term of 12 months and a fine totaling 6300 francs (90 daily rates of 70 francs).
Federal court sends judgment back
With this, however, the Cantonal Court of Schwyz overshot the mark – the highest court in Lausanne has now come to this conclusion. The federal court classifies the man’s fault as less severe than the cantonal court and has sent the case back to Schwyz for reassessment.
In particular, the Federal Supreme Court releases the former head of the office from sole responsibility for the faulty processes. For their part, the bodies involved in promoting sport had only inadequately checked his behavior for years.
The fault does not go significantly beyond a violation of competence.
He could not have “derived a free hand for unauthorized action from the negligence of the authorities involved,” writes the Federal Court in the judgment. Therefore this does not exonerate him “as a matter of fact”. But it is “in any case not absurd that he misinterpreted this tolerance of his efforts as consent”.
Overall, the culpability “does not go significantly beyond an overstepping of competencies”, according to the Federal Supreme Court. The sentence of the cantonal court therefore appears to be “disproportionately severe”. The Cantonal Court of Schwyz now has to correct the judgment downwards.