Graubünden's Justice System in a Twilight Zone
Not only individual cases, but the entire justice system in the canton of Graubünden has been under criticism for years. Observers speak of structural problems, a lack of transparency, incompetence, and a judicial apparatus that is increasingly squandering the trust of the population.
Like the hunting establishment, Graubünden's justice system is considered sluggish and inefficient.
Time and again, complaints arise that proceedings take excessively long, that file management and communication are inadequate, and that internal oversight barely functions. Insiders report a justice system that “is sufficient unto itself” — without clear leadership, without transparency, and without any discernible sense of accountability.
Such deficiencies result in even straightforward cases dragging on for inexplicably long periods, or decisions being made that are neither comprehensible nor properly documented. The loss of trust in the justice system of Switzerland's largest canton grows with each passing day.
The “Dark Chamber” of the Graubünden Justice Commission
The Justice Commission of the canton of Graubünden faces particularly sharp criticism. It is responsible for overseeing judges and prosecutors, yet according to critics it operates largely in the shadows. The media and the public are barely involved, and decisions are rarely explained or published. The term “dark chamber” has long since become established in political circles.
The lack of transparency in judicial oversight fuels suspicion of institutional self-insulation: oversight yes, but only on paper.
Amended Rulings Without Minutes
A further scandal has additionally shaken confidence: at the Graubünden Cantonal Court, rulings were subsequently altered without any deliberation minutes existing or the affected parties being informed. Legal experts speak of a serious violation of the rule of law. The subsequent modification of judgment texts without documentation undermines not only judicial integrity, but also the traceability of judicial decisions.
Conviction of a Former Judge
In November 2024, a former administrative judge of the canton of Graubünden was found guilty of multiple counts of physical sexual harassment, multiple counts of threatening behaviour, and rape. The case had already caused considerable controversy before the verdict, not least because the justice system remained inactive for a long time despite early indications of misconduct becoming known. The verdict casts a harsh light on systemic deficiencies: a judicial apparatus that protects itself rather than consistently investigating misconduct. The sum of these incidents makes clear: in Graubünden, the justice system is ailing not merely from isolated cases, but from deep-rooted structural failings.
In Focus: Public Prosecutor Ursin Brunett
At the centre of several cases is Public Prosecutor Ursin Brunett, who issued a penalty order against a defendant without ever conducting a hearing or presenting credible evidence, writes Inside Justiz. The allegation: defamation in connection with a letter to the editor — a sanction whose severity and formal handling falls far outside standard practice. Critics accuse Brunett of using the instrument of the penalty order in a manner that leaves the accused with virtually no opportunity to mount a defence. The sum of several thousand francs (CHF 10,350) and the immediate demand for payment accompanied by a payment slip — despite the unclear state of the case files — resembles a means of coercion rather than the opening of proceedings consistent with the rule of law. A telling example of Ursin Brunett's understanding of the law.
Furthermore, the case raises the question of the extent to which public prosecutors in Graubünden, under the leadership of the chief public prosecutor, are concerned with conducting proceedings transparently and under fair conditions. The lack of communication with the accused, the absence of evidence, and the failure to conduct a hearing fit into a broader pattern of criticism directed at the Graubünden justice system. Brunett is thus seen not merely as an actor in an isolated case, but as a symbol of how the public prosecutor's office and the judicial community in the canton handle contentious cases — and to what degree they still fulfil their public mandate.
Particularly troubling: the Chur administrative judge convicted of rape received an unconditional fine of merely 2,300 francs. That is significantly less than the fine demanded in connection with a letter to the editor that the accused did not even write.
When Wounded Hunter Egos Abuse the Justice System
Some hobby hunters miss their targets not in the forest, but in the courthouse. A particularly thin-skinned huntsman from Scuol feels insulted by an article on wildbeimwild.com that upstanding nature lovers welcome. Ten years after its publication. Yes, you read that correctly: ten years later! The complaint was filed on 19 February 2024. The private claimant had been aware of the contested publication no later than 22 July 2021, as he was a regular recipient of the newsletter. The three-month deadline had expired at the end of October 2021. The criminal complaint was filed late; proceedings should never have been opened.
The alleged scandal: an article from 2015 in which wildbeimwild.com critically examined the sacred myth of hobby hunting, accompanied by a freely available stock image published by the very same hobby hunter himself for the general public. The image shows the hobby hunter posing with his quarry. No name, no address, no personal insult. Just a general text about animal suffering, accessible at any time via the link to the comprehensive Hobby Hunter Radar .
But that was apparently too much for the thin-skinned hunting faction. Rather than seeking arguments or dialogue, the hobby hunter ran straight to the police station in Scuol.
When hunting pride collides with justice
In spring 2024, wildbeimwild.com received a penalty order from the Graubünden public prosecutor's office. The charge: defamation. The invoice amount for fines, cash expenses and fees: 1’245.– francs. The facts: the alleged offence dates back a decade. The application was filed far too late. And the offence had been statute-barred for years. The defendant did not know the claimant.
Yet instead of dismissing the proceedings, public prosecutor Ursin Brunett chose to do the hunting establishment a favour. While in Switzerland wild animals may still be slaughtered in a bestial, senseless and brutal manner for sport, an animal welfare article is criminalised. That is what one calls setting priorities — the Graubünden way.
The sacred cow in camouflage
Sectarian hobby hunting has become an untouchable religion in this country. Those who criticise it are branded as heretics. Those who expose abuses are subjected to legal persecution. And those who question the killing of wild animals are labelled “extreme” or “radical,” while the hobby hunters continue to indulge in their blood rituals.
The truth is simple: when someone proudly posts their trophies online with a grin, showing disregard for the dignity of animals, that is a matter of legitimate public discussion. Those who spread grinning images of killing cannot later complain about criticism.
But apparently the Swiss hunting lobby is of the opinion that it stands above the law and that the media had better remain silent when the truth becomes unpalatable.
What is happening here is nothing other than a classic reversal of perpetrator and victim. The person who kills animals for fun — and even pays for the privilege — casts themselves as the victim. And the person who draws attention to grievances is criminalized.
The Rule of Law in the Crosshairs
This case illustrates how easily the justice system can be instrumentalized. A late criminal complaint, an expired statute of limitations, no evidence of personal defamation — and yet the shots are fired. Not with lead, but with legal statutes. The complainant does not know the private plaintiff, did not name him by name, and used the image from the database without any defamatory intent. An individual identification by third parties was not possible. The necessary intent and any criminally relevant injury to personal honour are therefore absent. The lower courts did not substantively address the key objections — the missed deadline and the statute of limitations — but instead dismissed the complaint in blanket fashion. The penalty order even contains findings that are not supported by the case files and contradict the records of the hearing in Roveredo on 6 May 2024. All neatly handled under the protective hand of the chief public prosecutor in Chur.
A case that should have been resolved long ago is being kept artificially alive — much as one might prop up a dead deer to pose for a photograph in front of it. This is how justice operates not only in Graubünden: loudly, capriciously, manipulatively, and incapable of self-criticism.
Who Owns the Truth About Hobby Hunting?
For years, wildbeimwild.com has been documenting what the hobby hunters would prefer to keep quiet: animal suffering, lobbying, power games, and a justice system that frequently turns a blind eye when the weapon is in the «right» hands. Plaintiffs are muzzled when convicted hobby hunters face sentencing, or criminal complaints relating to hobby hunting are not pursued at all, even when the violations are blatant. One example illustrates this clearly:
By order dated August 27, the chief public prosecutor in Graubünden decided not to open proceedings. The order contains no reasoning. Under the law, orders issued by criminal authorities must be reasoned. The absence of reasoning violates fundamental procedural rights, in particular the right to be heard (Art. 29 para. 2 of the Federal Constitution).
Without reasoning, it is not apparent on what grounds the public prosecutor's office refused to initiate a criminal investigation. This makes it practically impossible to lodge a well-founded appeal.
But one thing is clear: as long as there are people who senselessly kill animals in the name of “nature conservation,” wildbeimwild.com will continue to report on this hypocrisy. We will not be intimidated or silenced — least of all by offended hobby hunters with wounded egos who feel their honour has been slighted, or by the justice system in Graubünden!
Shooting themselves in the foot
What began as an attempt to silence a critic has backfired. The public is once again witnessing just how quickly the hunting lobby reaches for its weapons when someone speaks the truth.
Those who kill animals must be able to bear criticism. Those who boast about blood must live with contradiction. And those who are still feigning outrage ten years later should perhaps hunt less and reflect more, rather than posting trophy photos and children's photos on Facebook for the public to see. If a soldier or police officer were to publish grinning trophy pictures with their victims, they would be dishonourably discharged and referred to a psychiatric clinic.
The official annual report shows that the Graubünden public prosecutor's office is under considerable strain (e.g. a high volume of penalty orders and pending cases). This systemic burden, combined with individual critical proceedings, suggests that structural problems are not merely coincidental.
To be continued …
HOBBY HUNTER RADAR
On the trail of concealed animal welfare offences, poaching and/or criminal activity? Report suspicious cases to us! Help with the great hobby hunter radar.
