Bis jetzt kein Sieger am Vincenz-Prozess: Der Ton bleibt nüchtern – umso härter wird in der Sache gestritten

In the ongoing Vincenz trial at the Federal Court, the focus is now shifting from Pierin Vincenz's spending excesses to the contentious company purchases. The two-week Berufungsverfahren before the Swiss Federal Court is in its first half, and despite the immense public interest, the atmosphere is markedly different from that of four years ago, when it took place in a Volkshaus.

The courtroom proceedings have taken on a more neutral and factual tone. The focus has moved away from Vincenz's spending excesses, which were a major issue in the previous trial, as these are now considered of lesser significance for the six-year prison sentence requested by the prosecution. Instead, the emphasis is on the controversial buyouts.

During his opening plea, chief prosecutor Marc Jean-Richard-dit-Bressel delved into the concept of retrocessions, which involves reimbursing commissions earned, particularly in the banking industry. The prosecution argued that Vincenz and his business partner's influence on the transactions was decisive, even though they failed to disclose their stakes.

They claimed to have been obliged to remit the profits to their employers. According to Jean-Richard, this unclaimed advantage is considered a retrocession, a notion upheld by several federal court judgments. The prosecution also highlighted the extensive media attention the case received, which led to a reduction in Vincenz's sentence by nine months by the district court, resulting in a six-year prison term.

The prosecution criticized Vincenz for actively seeking media attention, arguing that he cannot blame law enforcement for its subsequent coverage. Nonetheless, the "abundant dissemination of accusations" does not constitute a conviction. Consequently, the prosecution's plea to reduce the sentence is being reconsidered. On Friday, the case will be presented by Lorenz Erni, who is seeking a full acquittal for Vincenz.

Erni criticized the district court for not listening to the defense from the outset, questioning why the proceedings were initially scheduled for only five days. While Erni conceded that Vincenz should have disclosed his involvement in Commtrain to the Aduno management board, he argued that this disclosure duty does not imply a disclosure obligation.

This is because accusing Aduno of overpaying for Commtrain is baseless and unprovable. Erni suggested that the prosecution's reliance on retrocessions was a desperate attempt to save the case, with retrocession being the most frequently mentioned term in Erni's plea. He also noted that the judge, Christian Prinz, has been praised for his technical expertise and fair handling of the trial, even when criticizing the defendants, particularly regarding Vincenz's expenses.