Freedom of expression put to the test "Traitor to the people" video brings Youtuber to Lucerne court - lawyer calls for limits
A pandemic dispute from 2021 has reached the Lucerne district court - where two men are battling over nothing less than the limits of freedom of expression. The trial impressively showed how far apart the two camps still are today.
No time? blue News summarizes for you
- A conflict between lawyer Loris Mainardi and Youtuber Daniel Stricker, which has been smouldering since the pandemic, was heard by the Lucerne District Court on Friday.
- Mainardi accuses Stricker of having personally offended him in a video, while Stricker argues through his lawyer that his statements are exaggerated counter-speech and satirically protected.
- The court was unable to reach an agreement and intends to make a decision early next year.
On Friday afternoon, a dispute from the coronavirus pandemic that is now over four years old ended up before the Lucerne District Court. Loris Mainardi, a lawyer from Lucerne, and Daniel Stricker, a Youtuber from eastern Switzerland, were summoned. Around 30 people from Stricker's circle filled the courtroom - along with the parties, the judges and the journalist.
The case was politically significant for both men. They saw great relevance for society. But that was where the unity ended.
YouTube video versus opinion text
At the center of the case is a civil lawsuit filed by Mainardi for repeated infringement of personality rights. He accuses Stricker of having called him "Pinocchio's little nose", "traitor to the people" and "hater of the constitution", among other things, in a 33-minute video, thereby publicly disparaging him. Stricker countered via his lawyer that the statements were made as part of a satirical, sharply worded response to an opinion article disseminated by the mass media.
The conflict began in March 2021, when opponents of the measures demonstrated in Liestal BL. At the time, Mainardi demanded in the Tages-Anzeiger newspaper: "Viruses and lies must not spread faster than serious information." In times of crisis, he argued, unobjective criticism or even calls for disobedience are not protected by freedom of expression.
«The coronavirus liars' demonstrations pose an immediate danger.»
Lawyer in the "Tages-Anzeiger"
That same week, Stricker responded with a polemical video reply on his YouTube channel because he saw Mainardi's text as a massive attack on the fundamental right to freedom of demonstration.
Lawyer: "Traitor to the people" was an "empty fighting term"
The fronts quickly hardened. Mainardi initially filed a criminal complaint for defamation and insult. However, his attempt to prosecute Stricker failed in a grotesque manner: The public prosecutor's office scheduled a settlement hearing, which Mainardi failed to attend - ultimately leading to Stricker's acquittal. The Lucerne lawyer then took the case to a civil court and claimed repeated personal injury.
Stricker remained silent almost throughout the main hearing and let his lawyer have the floor. The latter accused Mainardi of having already condemned demonstrators as "liars" and "imminent danger" in his opinion piece, thereby massively escalating the political tone himself. He said that anyone who takes such a harsh tone in the country's largest newspaper must also endure sharply worded counter-speech in the public debate. According to the lawyer, the term "traitor to the people" was clearly described in the video as an "empty fighting term" and was not meant literally in the overall context.
Judge tried to reach an agreement at the last moment
Mainardi countered that tough debates were necessary, but that they needed limits. The Lucerne lawyer felt that Stricker's video clearly crossed the line because it stirred up hatred for him and attacked him personally. In addition, Stricker could not hide behind constantly changing roles: sometimes as a journalist, sometimes as a satirist, sometimes as a rapper, in order to claim media, artistic or satirical freedom as required. The term "traitor to the people" is particularly sensitive because it is historically charged and can fuel violent fantasies in a heated atmosphere.
«Mainardi needs a judicial dose of understanding of fundamental rights.»
Lawyer for Daniel Stricker
Court President Fridolin Fassbind, along with the other two judges, gave no indication of which way he was leaning. However, his reserved body language indicated that he was not very happy about having to make a judicial decision in this case. Shortly before the end, he tried to reach an amicable settlement - without success. Mainardi was only prepared to settle the dispute if Stricker paid the entire costs: "So that others also know where the boundaries lie." Stricker's lawyer countered that the lesson should go in the other direction: "Mainardi needs a judicial dose of understanding of fundamental rights."
There was no verdict on Friday evening. The district court wants to decide early next year.