In August 2023, a Polish farm worker was driving along the Collex road in Bellevue, in the canton of Geneva. His blood alcohol level was between 2.08 and 2.88 grams per litre, which is more than four times the legal limit. He was travelling at an estimated speed of between 80 and 133 km/h in a 60 km/h zone. He overtook three vehicles, hit a kerb, lost control of the car, and struck a 24-year-old cyclist from behind at over 70 km/h. The young man died.
The Geneva Criminal Court initially convicted him of murder: six and a half years’ imprisonment and a ten-year ban on residence. On appeal, the cantonal court reduced the sentence: manslaughter, three years’ imprisonment in total, half of which was suspended, with no ban on residence. The Public Prosecutor’s Office and the family of the deceased appealed to the Federal Court. The Federal Court has just ruled in favour of the appeal courts, not the Public Prosecutor’s Office.
The official reasoning is as follows: for there to be intentional homicide, the driver must have mentally ‘accepted’ that he could kill someone. The Federal Court considers that drink-drivers tend to underestimate the risks and overestimate their own abilities. Therefore, even though he was driving at four times the legal limit, this does not mean that he had accepted the possibility of killing anyone. And as if that were not enough, his state of intoxication was considered a mitigating factor, because the poor decisions he made that night – including getting behind the wheel – were taken whilst he was in an impaired state.
The cyclist was 24 years old, was riding correctly on a cycle lane, and was in no way at fault. The driver will serve between one and a half and three years in prison, depending on the final sentencing. The Federal Court’s case law expressly states that it has no intention of changing this approach. In Spain, this case would have taken a different course. In Switzerland, according to the Federal Court, this is the norm.