SVP bigwigs fight each other in court "Feels bullied", "clear words" - and suddenly Albert Rösti appears too

Madeleine Amstutz was once considered the hope of the Bernese SVP until she stumbled over an expenses scandal. On Tuesday, she is fighting for her reputation against former National Councillor Adrian Amstutz. Read the ticker to catch up.

• Liveticker

  New posts
• Liveticker closed
5.41 p.m.

Trial over - verdict on Monday

That's it for the trial. The court will now assess the evidence over the next few days. The verdict will be announced next Monday.

blue News concludes today's live ticker. We thank you for your interest and will continue to report on the developments in this case.

5.39 pm

The last word belongs to the two defendants

Madeleine Amstutz: "I have never apologized for any misconduct because there was no such thing."

Adrian Amstutz: "I have only publicly referred to accusations published by the municipal council and the GPK. I stand by what I said because it is true."

5.22 pm

Problematic "purge" formulation

The lawyer now refers to the accusations made by Madeleine Amstutz against Adrian Amstutz in her letter to the parliamentary group of the SVP of the canton of Bern. "The accusation that my client has conducted an orchestrated bullying campaign is defamatory." Even more problematic, however, is the use of the phrase "political cleansing campaign", especially as this is in the context of National Socialism.

His conclusion: "Madeleine Amstutz definitely went too far with this letter and made herself liable to prosecution."

Adrian Amstutz's defense lawyer is now also through with his plea.

5.13 pm

"Clear words are also allowed in political debates"

"Clear words are also allowed in political debates," says the defense lawyer. Even if Adrian Amstutz had not done so, it would be permissible in a political nomination process if accusations such as "bullshit" or "fraud" were clearly stated.

5.04 pm

This expense report requires "quite a lot of imagination"

Once again, the lawyer emphasizes that Adrian Amstutz always referred to the GPK report when making his statements. He had only been able to read the verdict of the cantonal governor's office after inspecting the files due to the criminal proceedings.

And according to the GPK report, Madeleine Amstutz had herself paid compensation for attending a funeral, for example. This could only be justified "with a great deal of imagination". Accordingly, Adrian Amstutz's statements on her handling of expenses were justified.

The defense lawyer also asked the court to take Madeleine Amstutz's refusal to make statements this morning (see entry at 9.37 a.m.) into account when assessing the evidence. "As a private plaintiff, she is obliged to testify", is the reason given.

4.43 p.m.

Committed, but not unlawful

At the delegates' meeting, his client explicitly mentioned that all people make mistakes and that these can be corrected. It had been a "committed, political debate", "but no criminally relevant line had been crossed", said the defense lawyer.

4.36 p.m.

"No criminally relevant statements"

Even at the relevant delegates' meeting of the SVP constituency association in Thun, only the persons requested by the private prosecution were questioned by the public prosecutor. Despite these circumstances, several people testified that Adrian Amstutz had made "no criminally relevant statements".

On the other hand, the public prosecutor's office had rejected the defense lawyer's request to question current Federal Councillor Albert Rösti, among others. "That's a shame, after all he is known as a tough but fair debater."

16.31 hrs

Witness statements would not incriminate Adrian Amstutz

The defense attorney quotes several people who were questioned by the public prosecutor's office in the run-up to the trial. Of the seven witnesses who testified at the request of the private prosecution, three were not even present at the party meeting in question. And the other four people had not been able to credibly substantiate the alleged defamation by Adrian Amstutz.

4.24 p.m.

"My client has chosen very clear words"

"My client used very clear words to point out the unjustified expense allowance," the lawyer explains. His client always referred to the GPK report. However, Adrian Amstutz never used words such as "lied" or "cheated".

4.18 p.m.

Amstutz against Amstutz for media attention?

Now it's the turn of Adrian Amstutz's defender. The Sigriswil "expenses affair" had not only been taken up repeatedly by his client, but also by many SVP politicians. However, she has only filed a criminal complaint against Adrian Amstutz because the story can be best exploited in the media due to his well-known name.

3.59 pm

Short break in the trial - Adrian Amstutz's lawyer follows

In the meantime, the defense lawyer has finished his plea. After a break in the proceedings, Adrian Amstutz's lawyer will counter.

3.57 p.m.

"Adrian Amstutz's statements were defamatory"

With his statements, Adrian Amstutz had created the impression that Madeleine Amstutz was a dishonest person who had enriched herself at the taxpayers' expense. "The defamation thus goes beyond the political level," argues the defense lawyer.

3.36 pm

Must a politician be able to withstand such criticism?

The accusations formulated in Madeleine Amstutz's letter concern Adrian Amstutz as a politician - and are in no way defamatory. "Adrian Amstutz has used his influence to create an atmosphere against my client," explains the defense lawyer. Today's hearing demonstrated that this was a personal matter for Adrian Amstutz.

3.19 p.m.

"My client felt bullied by Adrian Amstutz"

"A campaign was waged against my client for two years", says the defense lawyer. Now he comments on Adrian Amstutz's accusations of defamation. "My client felt bullied by Adrian Amstutz." The campaign and in particular the timing of the launch were intended to prevent his client from running for the National Council.

3.14 p.m.

Violation of official secrecy is not even possible

The defense attorney first addresses the accusation of violation of official secrecy. The public prosecutor's office argues that the documents submitted by Madeleine Amstutz to the Office of the District Governor are subject to official secrecy (see entry at 8.57 a.m.). According to the lawyer, however, this is not possible at all, as the Office of the District Governor is the next higher authority for a municipality and exchanges between these authorities are absolutely normal in everyday life.

3.01 p.m.

Now Madeleine Amstutz's lawyer is speaking

Now it's time for the defense lawyers to make their pleas. Madeleine Amstutz's lawyer kicks things off. "This is a story in which my client has won every case so far and yet lost everything." As popular as Madeleine Amstutz has remained at local level, the professional, political and financial damage she has suffered as a result of the various proceedings is just as serious.

2.48 p.m.

Short break in the trial

This concludes the taking of evidence. The trial is interrupted for a ten-minute break.

2.37 pm

Federal Councillor Albert Rösti also involved

The witness brings another prominent SVP name into play: Federal Councillor Albert Rösti. As a National Councillor at the time, he is said to have worked "very hard" to resolve the disputes between the party and Madeleine Amstutz - but without success.

2.33 p.m.

"Can't remember any criminal statements"

The next SVP witness has positioned himself before the judge. Like his predecessor, he has no recollection of Adrian Amstutz making any criminal statements at the SVP constituency association board meeting in Thun. But even for him: "I can't remember the individual votes."

2.18 pm

Witness exonerates Adrian Amstutz: "For me, everything was fair and disciplined"

The questioning - just like the questioning before it - demonstrates the problem when a hearing takes place more than four years after the relevant events: Memory deteriorates over the years. In this case, where exact quotes play a major role, this phenomenon is particularly problematic.

This witness can also no longer remember the wording of the statements made. However, he does not believe that defamatory formulations were used. "For me, everything was fair and disciplined."

2.10 p.m.

Trial continues - next questioning of witnesses

The trial continues in Thun. And the next witness questioning continues. The fourth witness of the day also comes from the SVP environment. Like his predecessors, he is to testify as to whether Adrian Amstutz made defamatory statements or not. "From my point of view, there was a tough discussion, but everything went correctly," he says.

11.58 a.m.

Lunch break

The trial is interrupted for a lunch break. It resumes at 2 pm.

11.55 a.m.

"How can you bring out so many guns"

The next witness is questioned - also a former SVP politician. Same procedure as before: he too is asked to testify about any statements made by Adrian Amstutz. And he, too, can no longer remember the exact quotes, but emphasizes: "I can't understand how you can use so much artillery to take down a person." The whole affair shook him. "The best thing would be for Mr and Mrs Amstutz to shake hands here and now and put an end to it."

11.35 a.m.

"There has been 'chiluggeret'"

The next witness is questioned - also a former representative of the local SVP. He too is questioned about statements that Adrian Amstutz is said to have made. The witness confirms the content of the quotes, but can no longer remember the wording. However, he is certain that Adrian Amstutz used the expression "Da ist 'tschiluggeret' worden".

11.15 a.m.

Witness confirms Adrian Amstutz's statements

The trial continues. Witnesses are now being questioned. First, the former president of the local SVP party in Sigriswil enters the courtroom. He recalls the party meeting at which Adrian Amstutz is said to have made controversial statements: "Certain statements were very rude."

The judge reads out the alleged statements (see entry at 9.24 a.m.). The witness confirms that he heard almost all of the quotes in the same way. He could no longer remember individual statements.

10.50 a.m.

What role did the letter play?

Madeleine Amstutz's lawyer wants to know to what extent Madeleine Amstutz's letter could have led to outrage in Sigriswil. Adrian Amstutz replies: "The outrage was already there beforehand." But the letter had shown him that he now had to act to protect himself and his family.

This concludes the questioning of Adrian Amstutz. The trial is interrupted for a short break.

10.45 a.m.

Lack of apology as a bone of contention

He also accuses Madeleine Amstutz of having "never admitted her misconduct and apologized for it". He himself had had to do this in numerous cases. "But I stood up and apologized for it."

10.36 a.m.

"I don't bully anyone"

There had never been a campaign led by him against Madeleine Amstutz. This is a "malicious insinuation". Other people are also said to have spoken out publicly against her. However, due to his high profile, he was the only person to be targeted.

The fact that he had been accused of bullying had affected him. "I don't bully anyone," says Adrian Amstutz. His name had been misused to divert attention from the facts of the case.

10.33 a.m.

Letter with hurtful content

Adrian Amstutz is now questioned as a private plaintiff. Among other things, he accuses Madeleine Amstutz of defamation in a letter (see entry at 9.10 a.m.).

"This letter hurt me", says Adrian Amstutz. His family has suffered from the subsequent media coverage.

10.28 a.m.

"I've never experienced anything like it"

"I've never experienced anything like it. And I have experienced a lot", Adrian Amstutz states. He had always referred to the GPK report when making his statements. That was all the information he had at the time.

10.12 a.m.

"You don't mourn in a cemetery on an hourly wage"

"The disappointment over Madeleine Amstutz's behavior is huge - even today," says Adrian Amstutz. It doesn't take a lawyer to realize that you don't earn an hourly wage of 40 francs for attending a funeral. "You simply don't do that." He stands by these statements and says: "If that is a criminal offense, then I am a criminal."

He disputes the wording of other quotes in the indictment. He had never used the term "tax evasion".

10.08 a.m.

Repayment to the municipality not at the center

At the time Amstutz made his statements, Madeleine Amstutz had already been exempted from repaying the municipal claim by the Thun cantonal governor's office. "I heard about this decision on the radio," says Amstutz. He can accept this decision, but emphasizes: "Even if this case has been decided legally, it is not yet over politically."

For him, it is not relevant whether money is paid back or not. For him, the decisive factor is whether there was serious misconduct or not.

10 a.m.

"This behavior is incomprehensible to me."

When asked by the judge, Amstutz confirmed: "I accused her of not adhering to regulations that she herself had signed." He also repeated his accusation in court that Madeleine Amstutz had claimed expenses for events that she had never attended. "This behavior is incomprehensible to me."

9.52 a.m.

"I never said she ate for free"

Now it's all about the reputation-damaging statements that Adrian Amstutz is said to have made (see entry at 9.24 am). "I can basically confirm these statements. My statements were based on the information published by the GPK and the municipal council." He had identified misconduct on the part of the then mayor and named it.

However, Amstutz emphasized: "I never used the terms 'lied' and 'cheated'. I was talking about misconduct." He also never said that Madeleine Amstutz had "eaten" for free at the Lauberhorn race. "Even if I had been speaking in dialect, I wouldn't have used that word."

9.42 a.m.

Adrian Amstutz is now being questioned

Adrian Amstutz now takes his seat in front of the judge. He is also questioned both as a defendant and as a private prosecutor. "I'm as well as can be after years of accusations that are untenable." The fact that his family had been affected was the biggest burden on him.

After 16 years in the federal parliament, he is now only involved in politics on a voluntary basis with the "Pro Schweiz" organization.

9.37 a.m.

No answer to questions

Adrian Amstutz's lawyer now wants to know details from Madeleine Amstutz about her expenses practices at the time. However, for all questions she refers to statements she has already made.

This concludes the questioning of Madeleine Amstutz.

9.24 a.m.

Adrian Amstutz is said to have damaged her reputation

Madeleine Amstutz is now questioned as a private plaintiff. She accuses Adrian Amstutz of defamation. At a party meeting of the Sigriswil section of the SVP, for example, he is alleged to have made statements such as "Madeleine Amstutz has stolen from the municipality and thus cheated the citizens of the municipality" or "She has written off time at the Lauberhorn race, even though she is invited and can eat and drink for free".

Adrian Amstutz is also said to have confirmed at a board meeting of the SVP constituency association in Thun that Madeleine Amstutz had unjustifiably collected tax money in over 70 positions. And at the delegates' meeting of the SVP constituency association in Thun, Adrian Amstutz is quoted in the indictment as saying: "I have been in office for 28 years and there has never been such a sad story."

Madeleine Amstutz confirms when asked by the judge: "He said all that." And she adds: "The campaign against me has caused me great damage - both politically and financially."

9.14 a.m.

"Adrian Amstutz bullied me" - "It's a political murder campaign"

At the time, she had been asked to take a stand against the allegations against her and had therefore written the letter. She says: "What I wrote back then is all true."

Adrian Amstutz had wanted to prevent her election to the National Council and had therefore waged a defamation campaign against her. "It's actually a political murder campaign," says Amstutz. The time when the allegations first arose in Sigriswil was particularly indicative of this.

When asked by the judge, she repeats: "Adrian Amstutz bullied me."

9.10 a.m.

Letter to the parliamentary group

On June 1, 2022, Madeleine Amstutz wrote a letter to the parliamentary group of the SVP of the canton of Bern. Among other things, she wrote passages such as "The attempt by Adrian Amstutz and his allies to expel me from the Sigriswil SVP has not succeeded" or "Despite clear judicial rulings, which have all spoken in my favor so far, these rulings are being ignored by Adrian Amstutz and his allies and the bullying campaign continues unchanged".

9.04 a.m.

"Yes, I was aware that the minutes are not public"

Adrian Amstutz accuses Madeleine Amstutz of having submitted the documents via a lawyer, even though she knew that the meetings and minutes of the municipal council are not public.

"Yes, I was aware that the minutes are not public," says Madeleine Amstutz. However, she emphasizes that an exchange between the municipal council and the governor's office on internal business is also customary.

8.57 a.m.

A series of controversial documents

Specifically, it concerns a whole list of documents, including minutes from municipal council meetings and emails, which Madeleine Amstutz submitted as evidence in the appeal proceedings before the Thun cantonal governor's office, which she conducted in her own name. "I had the documents on my laptop," says Amstutz. She also had access to the documents via an online tool.

8.53 a.m.

"I'm doing well under the circumstances"

Madeleine Amstutz is questioned both as a private plaintiff and as a defendant due to the special circumstances. "I'm doing well under the circumstances," says Amstutz by way of introduction. She is accused of disclosing secrets that were entrusted to her as part of her role as municipal president.

8.38 a.m.

Trial begins

Court President Matthias Zurbrügg opens the trial, welcomes everyone present and explains the procedure. Madeleine and Adrian Amstutz both appear calm and composed. The public prosecutor is not present in person.

First up is the questioning of Madeleine Amstutz.

8.29 a.m.

Trial delayed

Good morning from Thun. The courtroom doors are still closed. The scheduled start of the trial at 8.30 a.m. will therefore be delayed by a few minutes.

Show more

Madeleine Amstutz was once regarded as the shining hope of the Bernese SVP. She was the mayor of Sigriswil, a member of the Grand Council and SVP parliamentary group leader in the Grand Council. Now she finds herself in the middle of a political and legal dispute that has lasted for years. At the center is an expenses affair from 2019/2020.

The "Expenses knight of Sigriswil" or "Too much Stutz" Amstutz was the headline in the Blick newspaper in 2020. The affair was triggered by a report by the Sigriswil Audit Committee (GPK), on the basis of which the municipal council demanded CHF 3,250 back.

Madeleine Amstutz is said to have received too much expense money over the years and was not very precise when it came to accounting. There was talk, for example, of her participation in a VIP event at the Lauberhorn race, which she had billed for even though she had been invited. Attending funerals at municipal expense or a boat trip at the taxpayers' expense also found their way into the media coverage.

Amstutz denies accusations

The SVP subsequently refused her candidacy at all levels and finally expelled her from the party altogether in 2022.

Amstutz vehemently denied the allegations from the outset. For her, the accusations are a targeted defamation campaign. The aim was to oust her from the SVP after a stellar political career.

Since then, she has been fighting for her reputation and putting up legal resistance. With success: the district governor of Thun exonerated her in 2020 and lifted the clawback. Further rulings confirmed that Amstutz was wrongly excluded from the Grand Council parliamentary group. Former members of the GPK were convicted of defamation in October 2023.

Amstutz also continued her political career. She formed her own list and is still a municipal councillor and member of the Grand Council today, now independent. However, while she managed to enter the municipal council with the best result in 2020, she received the fewest votes of the seven elected in 2024.

Amstutz against Amstutz - showdown in court

Today, the expenses affair is set to add another chapter: Madeleine Amstutz and her former political companion and namesake Adrian Amstutz will meet at the Oberland Regional Court in Thun. The two are not related.

Madeleine Amstutz has filed a criminal complaint against former National Councillor Adrian Amstutz - also from Sigriswil. He in turn has responded with a complaint. The charges relate to defamation, slander and violation of official secrecy.

Adrian Amstutz spent 16 years in the Federal Parliament, including five years as leader of the SVP parliamentary group. Madeleine Amstutz suspects him to be the mastermind behind the defamation campaign. He is also said to have spoken out against her at SVP events and insulted her.

blue News is on site in Thun and will be reporting live from the Oberland Regional Court from 8.30 am.

Transparency note: An earlier version of this article stated that Adrian Amstutz had also filed a complaint against Madeleine Amstutz for breach of official secrecy. This is not true. Adrian Amstutz is only acting as a private plaintiff for the offense of "defamation".