Spiess-Hegglin case: Philipp Gut found guilty of libel

Gut had written that the former Zug cantonal councillor Jolanda Spiess-Hegglin had only made up the alleged defilement by SVP cantonal councillor Markus Hürlimann in order to cover up her infidelity. The court sentenced Gut to a conditional fine of 60 daily rates of CHF 130 each with a probationary period of two years.

The article entitled "The fatal consequences of a misstep" must be deleted from the Weltwoche online archive and from the SMD media database on the instructions of the court. The court also ordered Weltwoche to publish the condemnation on the "Analysis and Commentary" page. Gut must also pay Spiess-Hegglin compensation of CHF 2,500 and damages of CHF 12,000.

The journalist had made accusations about facts in his article, the judge justified the ruling. He had disparaged Spiess-Hegglin in front of a broad public and violated her honor. The text also contained truths. "But as far as the defamatory statements are concerned, he clearly overstepped the mark."

Weltwoche notes the guilty verdict "with astonishment", as Gut said after the trial. They will now await the written verdict and then decide whether it will be appealed.

For Spiess-Hegglin, it was "a good day for media law and media ethics". She hopes that the ruling will be applied in future practice, for example in journalism training.

"Scheduled false accusations"

The trial was triggered by a Weltwoche article from September 2015 in which Gut investigated the sex affair involving Jolanda Spiess-Hegglin and her former council colleague Markus Hürlimann, in which knockout drops were allegedly involved. However, the proceedings against Hürlimann were dropped due to a lack of evidence.

Gut wrote that Spiess-Hegglin had only made up the desecration in order to cover up her faux pas in front of her husband. The investigation files would show how "the left-wing woman deliberately falsely accused the right-wing man". Spiess was a politician for the "Alternative - Die Grünen Zug" party.

Gut emphasized during the trial that he had written the text based on investigation files and witness statements. "I only did what I thought was right as a journalist." However, the district court concluded that there was no evidence that Spiess-Hegglin had deliberately spread false accusations.

Not the first conviction

Gut had already been sentenced to a conditional fine for defamation - by the same judge. In September 2016, he came to the conclusion that Gut's critical articles about the historian Philipp Sarasin and his partner Svenja Goltermann were a "broad-based campaign". Nevertheless, Gut does not have a criminal record for this, but is considered a "first offender". Monday's sentence was imposed as a so-called additional sentence because the text about the Zug sex affair appeared before the Sarasin verdict was handed down. The two cases are therefore considered as one - and the sentences are added together. Gut received a total of 240 daily sentences of CHF 130 for his two convictions. However, Weltwoche will only have to pay if Gut is convicted again.

Fight against hate comments

Spiess-Hegglin resigned from the Zug Cantonal Council at the end of 2016 and has since focused on her fight against hate speech. She founded an association that aims to support victims of offensive comments. She has also repeatedly taken legal action in the media against people who insulted her over the Zug affair. Hürlimann chose a different path. He went into hiding for a while and let the matter grow over. He is still a Zug cantonal councillor. In the meantime, the former president of the Zug SVP has also returned to an official function in the party: he has been the press spokesman for the Zug SVP for a few weeks now. (SDA)

Collage: Keystone/Archive/Courts of Zurich