Lawyer explains "There is only one way to get justice for the victims"

After the fire in Crans-Montana VS, justice and compensation are being demanded for the victims. Lawyer Rolf P. Steinegger is familiar with so-called "mass damages" - and has an example from the past of how this legal case should be handled.

The tragedy in Crans-Montana left 40 people dead and 116 injured. The news went around the world. Witnesses and rescue workers spoke of war-like conditions at the scene of the fire. Relatives waited for days to find out whether their child was dead or which hospital they were in. Doctors are still fighting for the survival of the seriously injured.

Now one question is getting louder and louder: who is responsible for the tragedy?

The bar operators and the municipality of Crans-Montana, which is responsible for fire safety inspections, are being criticized. The insulation materials in the bar apparently did not comply with regulations and therefore caught fire. The escape routes also appear not to have complied with the regulations, according to former employees. The municipality will present its side of the story at a press conference on Tuesday.

The canton of Valais has already initiated criminal proceedings against the two bar operators. They are accused of negligent homicide, negligent bodily harm and arson. However, they have publicly criticized the municipality, which has only carried out three inspections in 10 years.

Lawyer has an idea of how justice could be served quickly

If they can be proven to have made mistakes, the municipality and the operating couple could face legal consequences. Experts expect the legal dispute to last for years. But what about compensation for the numerous victims and their families? And what could a satisfactory trial and verdict look like?

blue News asked lawyer Rolf P. Steinegger, who is currently working on the Crans-Montana case. He specializes in the area of "doctors and the law", is familiar with the topic from previous major events and sees a solution that would both bring justice for the injured parties and hold the alleged perpetrators to account.

In his opinion, there are now two ways in which the legal case can develop - one good, and one bad. "The so-called 'Kaprun option' and the 'Luxor option'. The first example shows how it should not be done, the second could be the solution for Crans-Montana," says the lawyer.

Option number one: Kaprun

The tunnel fire in Kaprun, Austria, on November 11, 2000 claimed 155 lives. Despite the tragedy, all 16 defendants were acquitted in the criminal proceedings. A German investigation was also dropped in 2008 and an appeal to the European Court of Human Rights was unsuccessful.

Civil proceedings continued in Austria for years: Around 100 lawsuits with 243 plaintiffs were filed. After eight years, a settlement was reached: a total of 13.9 million euros was paid out to the surviving dependants - this corresponds to around 30,000 euros per victim out of a total of 451 claimants.

What we don't know yetThese questions about the fire disaster are still unanswered

Steinegger says: "From a Swiss perspective, given the level of liability, this is a ridiculous sum." The victims' legal costs must be deducted from this amount. "This results in an eight-year zero-sum game. In the end, the victims and their relatives complained that there had been no fair trial. To this day, no one has taken responsibility," says Steinegger. Not to mention the additional, high costs for the victims' families that had to be paid for the treatment.

Option number two: Luxor

In the terrorist attack in Luxor (Egypt) on November 17, 1997, 58 tourists were killed - including 36 Swiss nationals - and 24 people were injured, including 12 Swiss nationals. In 1998, the victims and their families began to assert claims against the tour operators. At the same time, the social and private insurers entitled to recourse, i.e. insurers such as AHV, IV, UVG and health insurers, as well as the cantons, came onto the scene. There was the threat of years of legal disputes.

In May 1999, the Swiss Confederation, represented by the Federal Office of Justice, offered to mediate in order to avoid lengthy court proceedings that would increase the suffering of the victims.

An amicable settlement was finally reached on October 22, 1999: The tour operators and their liability insurers paid CHF 5 million for uncovered direct losses to a compensation pool and CHF 300,000 to the recourse insurers. These insurers waived further recourse claims in favor of the injured parties.

Tragedy in Crans-Montana VSAll 116 injured identified - 83 are still in hospital

Steinegger says: "In the end, everyone was satisfied with the settlement. On average, each victim and their relatives received over CHF 100,000 net from the pool for the uncovered direct loss, with claims against their insurers intact." With this settlement of a mass loss within two years, the parties involved, above all the Swiss Confederation, have secured national and international respect, Steinegger notes.

Compensate victims, hold perpetrators accountable

Applied to the Crans-Montana case, this would mean that The victims could be compensated by means of a legal settlement by the insurance companies, thus saving themselves a lengthy process and covering any health costs instead. In addition, separate criminal proceedings could be opened to hold the bar operators or others responsible for the tragedy to account.

Steinegger has clear words: "Under the leadership of the federal government, the 'Luxor option' must be implemented without delay in the Crans-Montana case. This must be done with the involvement of specialists who have already been involved in the settlement of mass claims."

Although the conclusion of an out-of-court settlement is basically none of the state's business, Steinegger believes that the Confederation needs the "soft power" to initiate and implement the agreement.