Pilot flew helicopter under Rhine bridge – five-year legal dispute before Glarus cantonal court
A Swiss pilot flew a helicopter under a Rhine bridge on Christmas Eve 2021. Since then, a complex legal dispute with the Federal Office of Civil Aviation (FOCA) has been ongoing.
Spectacular helicopter manoeuvre from 2021 lands in court after five years
Google News CH — Crime (de) reports on an unusual case occupying the Glarus cantonal court: On Christmas Eve 2021, a pilot flew his helicopter towards a bridge spanning the Rhine – so low that he could pass underneath it. That is exactly what he did. He then pulled the aircraft almost vertically upwards, performed a sharp turn and continued flying in the opposite direction. A walker filmed the manoeuvre.
Two days later, '20 Minuten' published the video. That same day, the pilot reported his manoeuvre to the Federal Office of Civil Aviation (FOCA). His flying licence was subsequently withdrawn for two months. Additionally, he was to pay a fine.
Counter-offensive with complaints and recusal requests
What initially appeared manageable has developed into a five-year legal dispute. The pilot demanded an assessment by the criminal court, which brought the case – he lives in the canton of Glarus – before the Glarus cantonal court. With complaints and recusal requests, he launched a comprehensive counter-offensive against FOCA.
In April 2022, the pilot filed a recusal request against two FOCA employees who had prepared an investigation report on the flight manoeuvre. He justified the application partly on the grounds that the two had displaced a colleague from the case to take over his file. The affected employees rejected the allegations: they did not know the complainant personally and would derive no advantage from a possible licence withdrawal. The file had been assigned to them because the other employee had left, according to the Federal Administrative Court's ruling on the recusal request.
In 2023, a third proceeding was added: criminal proceedings against the FOCA employees. In March 2024, the Federal Administrative Court rejected the recusal request, and a month later also rejected the complaint against the flight licence withdrawal. The pilot subsequently took the matter to Federal Court – without success: in March of this year, the Federal Court also rejected his complaint. The criminal proceedings against the FOCA employees remain open.
Hearing in Glarus: pilot remains silent, defence counsel reticent
The pilot arrived at the court hearing dressed casually – black On shoes, jeans, a light shirt and a black jacket. At the beginning of the hearing, he was long unable to get a word in; his defence counsel Philippe Renz spoke with the judge about applications filed at short notice.
One of these applications concerned an accusation by the pilot against FOCA employees. The cantonal court proceedings should be suspended, Renz demanded, as long as no ruling had been issued in that case. The FOCA representative only learned of the new applications in court. "That leaves me speechless. The arguments are on the table," he said. The cantonal judge then suspended the hearing for ten minutes.
To all substantive questions from the judge, the pilot responded exclusively with: "I make no statement on this" or "I invoke my right to refuse to give evidence." Even when asked why he had carried out the manoeuvre, he did not respond. He provided only details regarding name, date of birth, place of residence and state of health – the latter with the word "Good".
Renz also kept his plea brief. As long as the ongoing criminal proceedings against the FOCA employees had not been concluded, he could not present a complete defence, he explained. According to his own account, Renz represents several clients in proceedings against FOCA and the Office for the Environment, Traffic and Communications (UVEK).
FOCA: endangered human lives, unprecedented approach
FOCA acts in this case as a prosecuting authority; no public prosecution office is present. The FOCA representative emphasised in court that the facts were clear and substantiated. It was unprecedented how many proceedings had been opened in order to undermine the credibility and operational capacity of FOCA.
According to the Standardised European Rules of the Air (SERA), aircraft must not be operated in a negligent or intentionally reckless manner that endangers human lives or third-party property. When the helicopter flew under the bridge, the pilot had endangered human lives: a person had been in the vicinity of the bridge. Furthermore, a person who was driving over the bridge at that moment could have been startled by the helicopter and lost control of their vehicle. The endangering of third-party property had also been present, according to the FOCA representative.
The pilot, by contrast, sees himself in the role of victim – and has expressed this stance through his largely remaining silent in court as well as the numerous counter-proceedings. A ruling from the Glarus cantonal court is still pending.
Source: Google News CH — Crime (de)