The trial against former Raiffeisen head Pierin Vincenz gets thrown out on a technicality. A year ago, the same thing happened to Zurich's prosecuting attorneys in Bellinzona with the since toppled infamous financier Florian Homm.

The hurdles posed by complex business cases once again prove to be too high for district attorneys and judges.

On Tuesday, the Zurich prosecuting attorney, and the city's district court, seemingly fell flat on their face. The canton's upper court overturned the conviction against Pierin Vincenz and his alleged accomplices after establishing material procedural errors in the original charges and legal procedures.

About two years ago, the city court had convicted the former head of Raiffeisen Switzerland of fraud and negligence, sentencing him to three years and nine months in prison. The other main perpetrator alleged in the case, Beat Stocker, received a full four years. Three others received initial convictions. Practically everyone, however, subsequently appealed the decision.

Sheer Volume

But that appeal won't be taking place this year, or anytime soon. Instead, the Zurich prosecutors have to start over from the ground up. The upper court criticized the charge sheet for being more than 400 pages long. That was way too much for the legal terms of reference involved, making it too difficult for the accused to defend themselves, obstructing their right to have a free and fair trial. In other words, the Zurich district attorneys were stumped by sheer volumes.

The same thing happened at the Swiss Federal Criminal Court in Bellinzona against ex-hedge fund manager and financier Florian Homm last summer. It dissolved into thin air, as the Swiss daily newspaper «Tages-Anzeiger» (paywall, German only) then reported, only it wasn't because of the severity of the charges or anything like that – but a small detail in the procedures that prompted the breakdown.

On the Run

At the time, finews.com portrayed the case as being that of a flamboyant German financier who disappeared in 2007 before escaping Swiss charges altogether. That was before a US arrest order in 2013 prompted authorities to catch up with him in Florence, Italy. Despite that, he was not extradited to the US.

Since then Homm has returned to Germany and become a devout Christian, author, and coach for life and finance matters where finews.ch (German only) once had the opportunity to interview him.

To wit, the Swiss trial against Homm has been running the danger of breaking the statute of limitations after its delays last year even though the Bellinzona court managed to decide parts of the case in 2021. The judges convicted the former hedge fund manager for business fraud and management negligence to three years in prison, of which 18 months could be served under parole. At the same time, the court confiscated his assets and imposed a disciplinary fine.

No-show with Consequences

As was reported then, Homm stayed very far away from the proceedings even though that was something the conviction itself was supposed to fully remediate.

According to news reports, the court summons had also provided a substitute date, something it could only do after he didn't appear the first time. But the infamous financier who once stood high on the FBI's most wanted list didn't show up, citing the pandemic as a reason. But it was already too late. The mistake had happened and the appeals court annulled the conviction.

That now means the entire trail has to be restarted from the ground up. Right now, it seems likely that it will be the end of the year before it starts.

Devil in the Detail

In the Homm case, it is unclear what the statute of limitation means when it comes to any revived charges. When it comes to Vincenz, the upper court suspended the statute of limitations. It could take years until the ex-bank manager and the other defendants face another trial in the district court. 

The devil seems to be in the detail (Bellinzona) or volume (Zurich). The risk of mistrials in such cases is so high that plaintiffs and judges aren't able to submit or decide on a sturdy, robust set of charges and convictions that stands the test of time and the higher courts. The signal it sends out to the wider Swiss finance sector is a dubious one. Right now, it seems like complex business and finance cases run the danger of, rather ironically, railroading the entire Swiss legal system.