Lawyers Seek Harsher Charges in Crans-Montana Bar Fire Case

Legal pressure is mounting in Switzerland as two lawyers call for more severe charges in connection with the deadly fire that occurred at a bar in Crans-Montana on January 1.

The lawyers, representing different parties involved in the case, are urging prosecutors to upgrade the charges against the bar owners from negligent manslaughter to murder with eventual intent.

According to Swiss public broadcaster RTS, and confirmed by the Valais cantonal Public Prosecutor’s Office, attorney Sophie Haenni—who represents the waitress accused of starting the fire—and lawyer Ludovic Tirelli, acting for the victims’ families, have both formally written to the Public Prosecutor in recent days.

Their request follows recent statements made by bar owner Jessica Moretti during a hearing before the panel of prosecutors handling the investigation. These statements are linked to earlier WhatsApp exchanges from 2019 involving former employees, which have now become part of the ongoing legal scrutiny.

The case revolves around the deadly fire at the Constellation bar, which has already raised serious questions about responsibility, safety standards, and decision-making within the establishment.

Prosecutors are currently reviewing the request while continuing their investigation into the circumstances surrounding the incident and the chain of events that led to the tragedy.

If the charges are upgraded, the case could take a significantly different legal direction, potentially leading to more severe penalties for those found responsible.

The Crans-Montana fire case remains one of the most closely watched legal proceedings in the Valais region, as families of the victims continue to seek justice and clarity over what happened on that night.

93-Year-Old Chinese Widow Ordered to Leave Switzerland.

A 93-year-old Chinese woman has been ordered to leave Switzerland despite receiving intensive care from her daughter living in the country.

The decision was confirmed by the Bern Administrative Court after authorities ruled that the legal requirements for residency based on family dependency had not been sufficiently proven.

The elderly woman’s daughter, who holds a Swiss passport, lives with her family in the Bern region. In 2018, she travelled to China to care for her seriously ill father.

Following his death, she brought her mother to Switzerland in late 2021 on a visa and later applied for a residence permit on humanitarian and family grounds.

According to the appeal documents, the 93-year-old widow suffers from mild dementia and several age-related health conditions.

Her legal representatives argued that she was emotionally and psychologically dependent on her daughter for daily support and care.

However, the Bern Administrative Court ruled that Swiss immigration law requires proof of an “indispensable dependency” to justify a right to remain in the country for family reasons.

The judges concluded that this level of dependency had not been clearly established in the case.

The court also stated that medical diagnoses such as mild dementia do not automatically guarantee residency rights in Switzerland. Judges further argued that appropriate care could still be arranged in the woman’s hometown of Nanjing in China.

Additionally, the court found that the woman lacked sufficiently strong ties to Switzerland to qualify for a pensioner residence permit.

Authorities also rejected claims of humanitarian hardship, stating that there was insufficient evidence proving that returning to China would result in a premature death.

The woman has been ordered to leave Switzerland before June 17, 2026. However, the case may still be appealed to the Swiss Federal Court, leaving a final legal decision pending.

The ruling has sparked discussion among immigration observers and human rights advocates regarding elderly care, family reunification policies, and humanitarian considerations within the Swiss legal system.

Court Bans In-Office Judge Romance

Switzerland’s highest judicial body has ruled that romantic relationships between federal judges are incompatible with the court’s professional standards and judicial customs.

The decision was made during an extraordinary meeting of all members of the Federal Supreme Court of Switzerland on Wednesday following public attention surrounding a relationship between two federal judges.

The controversy emerged after reports revealed a relationship between federal judge Beatrice van de Graaf and federal judge Yves Donzallaz. The matter became public in April through reporting by the German-language publication Weltwoche.

According to a statement released by the Federal Court, judges are expected to avoid behaviour that could raise concerns about their independence, impartiality, or the reputation of the judiciary.

The court announced that an independent panel of experts will examine the specific case involving the two judges. An external specialist has been tasked with clarifying the facts and reporting findings to the Administrative Commission of the Federal Court.

Officials stated that the investigation results are expected by the end of June, after which the court will decide on any further action.

While the inquiry into the individual case remains ongoing, the court separately confirmed that romantic relationships between members of the court are fundamentally considered incompatible with current judicial conduct standards.

The development has sparked debate in Switzerland regarding judicial ethics, independence, and personal conduct within the country’s highest legal institutions.