Sperisen takes Switzerland back to European human-rights court

More than 14 years of criminal proceedings have brought Erwin Sperisen back to Strasbourg. The former Guatemalan police chief has filed a fresh application against Switzerland with the European Court of Human Rights, arguing that the length of the case violates his right to a hearing within a reasonable time.

The application targets the continuing delay after Sperisen’s latest conviction in Geneva. The cantonal courts sentenced him to 14 years in prison in September 2024 for complicity in the murder of seven prisoners in Guatemala. His appeal has remained before the Swiss Federal Court for more than 20 months, according to his lawyers.

The case places Switzerland’s handling of a complex international criminal file under renewed scrutiny. Sperisen, a dual Swiss and Guatemalan national, sought refuge in Switzerland with his family in 2007. Geneva authorities arrested him in 2012, beginning a legal process that has now passed through four trials.

His latest Strasbourg complaint follows a 2023 European Court of Human Rights ruling against Switzerland, which his lawyer says found a violation of his right to a fair trial. The new application focuses on duration, while the domestic appeal remains unresolved.

Geneva has convicted Sperisen after four trials, each one carrying the case back into the Swiss courts. The proceedings concern the deaths of seven prisoners in a Guatemalan prison and Sperisen’s alleged role as an accomplice. Geneva courts imposed the latest 14 year sentence when he was 56.

Sperisen’s defence has attacked the judgment in unusually forceful terms, calling it “an abuse of power”. His lawyers point to the treatment of other defendants in the same case. They say all of Sperisen’s co defendants were either acquitted or saw their cases dismissed by courts abroad.

One example is Javier Figueroa, a former subordinate of Sperisen. An Austrian court acquitted Figueroa 13 years ago, according to the defence. Geneva nevertheless convicted Sperisen as the “accomplice of an acquitted person”, a description his lawyers cite as evidence of an incoherent outcome.

Those comparisons form part of the defence’s wider challenge to the Swiss process. They do not determine the Federal Court appeal or the Strasbourg application, but they show why the case continues to generate legal disputes across jurisdictions. The immediate question for Switzerland is whether its highest court will resolve the domestic appeal before the European court assesses the complaint about delay.

Sperisen’s defence has expanded its challenge from the verdict to the conduct of Geneva’s judiciary. In June 2025, he filed a criminal complaint with the Office of the Attorney General of the canton of Geneva against several Geneva judges. His lawyers accuse them of abuse of authority and defamation.

The defence says judges deliberately violated Sperisen’s presumption of innocence and disregarded instructions from the Federal Court. It has also sought the appointment of a special prosecutor from outside Geneva, citing what it calls “manifest bias”. Former co defendants, all acquitted according to the defence, have filed additional complaints against members of the Geneva judiciary.

These allegations remain claims by Sperisen and his lawyers. The source does not report a final decision on the complaints or on the request for an external prosecutor. The Federal Court has also yet to rule on the appeal against the 2024 conviction.

The procedural layering matters. Domestic courts must address the conviction, while Swiss authorities may have to respond to complaints about judicial conduct. At the international level, Strasbourg will examine the human rights arguments brought against Switzerland. Each process follows its own rules, adding further time to a case already running for more than 14 years.

The Federal Court’s next decision will shape the Swiss phase of a case that has already reached Europe twice. Sperisen’s appeal against the September 2024 Geneva conviction has been pending for more than 20 months, according to his lawyers. Until the court rules, the domestic proceedings remain open.

The Strasbourg application gives Switzerland another human rights issue to answer. The European Court of Human Rights has already ruled against Switzerland in 2023, according to Sperisen’s lawyer, on the right to a fair trial. His latest complaint asks the court to consider whether the overall duration of the proceedings also breached the European Convention on Human Rights.

Sperisen has lived in Switzerland since seeking refuge with his family in 2007. His prosecution has linked Geneva to crimes committed during Guatemala’s violent past, while raising questions about how Swiss courts handle evidence, defendants and appeals in cases with international dimensions.

The eventual outcomes could arrive on separate tracks. The Federal Court may uphold, overturn or otherwise address the Geneva judgment. Strasbourg may decide whether the length of the proceedings violated Sperisen’s rights. For Swiss institutions, the case keeps the standards of fair trial, judicial impartiality and procedural efficiency in public view.