Zurich court finds Weltwoche author Philipp Gut guilty

Following the Zurich District Court, the Zurich High Court has now also ruled in favor of the Weltwoche-author Philipp Gut found guilty of defamation. 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.

On Tuesday, the High Court sentenced Gut to a conditional fine of 60 daily rates of CHF 130 each with a probationary period of two years. Gut must also pay Spiess-Hegglin CHF 2,500 in satisfaction and compensation for her legal fees.

The higher judges therefore confirmed the district court's ruling from May 2017, finding that Gut did not have sufficient evidence to support his claim. The Weltwoche-The author reiterated in court that his article was correct and factual. He had good sources and stuck to the core statements of the text.

"Anyone who seeks publicity to the extent that Spiess-Hegglin does must also put up with critical reporting," his lawyer added. The verdict is not yet legally binding. Gut can still appeal to the Federal Supreme Court. Whether he will do so remains to be seen. According to his lawyer, the verdict will be analyzed first.

The Weltwoche-Author Gut asserted before the High Court that his article was correct and factual. He had good sources and stuck to the core statements of the text. "Anyone who seeks publicity to the extent that Spiess-Hegglin does must also put up with critical reporting," his lawyer added.

It was not until May that Spiess-Hegglin emerged victorious against the Ringier publishing house. The Zug Cantonal Court came to the conclusion that the View had violated the personal rights of the former politician. Ringier is to pay Spiess-Hegglin compensation of CHF 20,000. However, the Zug court rejected her request for an apology. Both Ringier and Spiess-Hegglin do not accept the ruling and are appealing.

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 against people who have insulted her over the Zug affair.

SVP politician Hürlimann chose a different path to Spiess-Hegglin. Instead of seeking publicity, he went into hiding and let the grass grow over the matter. He is now no longer a member of the Zug cantonal council either. (SDA)

However, Gut was successful with the civil claims: The High Court came to the conclusion that the article entitled "The fatal consequences of a misstep" was not taken from the online archive of the Weltwoche and does not have to be deleted from the SMD media database. In addition, the Weltwoche not print the judgment in the newspaper. This had been ordered by the district court.

However, the High Court was of the opinion that Philipp Gut was standing trial as an individual - and not the Weltwoche. As an employee, Gut has no authorization to delete texts.

Spiess-Hegglin also suffered a setback with regard to the Zug public prosecutor's decision to suspend proceedings, which she wanted to keep under lock and key for all time in order to prevent further media reports. However, the High Court did not consider this risk of a new violation of personality rights to be sufficient.

Moreover, Spiess-Hegglin was not entitled to demand this, as it had not referred the case to the High Court. However, an appeal would have been a prerequisite for making claims.

The process was triggered by a Weltwoche-In the article from September 2015, Gut looked into the affair surrounding Jolanda Spiess-Hegglin and her then 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".

It was not until May that Spiess-Hegglin emerged victorious against the Ringier publishing house. The Zug Cantonal Court came to the conclusion that the View had violated the personal rights of the former politician. Ringier is to pay Spiess-Hegglin compensation of CHF 20,000. However, the Zug court rejected her request for an apology. Both Ringier and Spiess-Hegglin do not accept the ruling and are appealing.

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.

SVP politician Hürlimann chose a different path to Spiess-Hegglin. Instead of seeking publicity, he went into hiding and let the grass grow over the matter. He is now no longer a member of the Zug cantonal council either. (SDA)