SRF apologizes to Dadvan Yousuf and deletes article

Swiss television apologizes to the controversial crypto entrepreneur and deletes a critical article about him. That could have been the end of the conflict.

The good and previously known message for him: Yousuf achieved a breakthrough in his legal dispute against Swiss radio and television (SRF). This was triggered in February 2022 by a news contribution, which was based on an anonymous source of « questionable transactions » and was indirectly related to fraud, terrorist financing and the warring parties Russia and Ukraine. Yousuf showed SRF because of a bad recovery.

SRF accepted criminal commands, but defended the story

After a longer legal dispute with different assessment of the situation by the public prosecutor and judge, the two accepted Author of the controversial contribution a criminal order for bad recovery. SRF stuck to the presentation. The criminal orders would only be accepted to protect journalistic source protection, it said in a media release. Thereupon Referred to Yousuf again for a bad recovery Against the unknown author of the media release. In addition, he had his lawyers act in civil law against the Leutschenbach broadcaster with the aim of compensation.

Before the Peace judge could the parties do not agreeYousuf received a complaint. Last week now there was an extraordinary agreement in which SRF Yousuf is accommodating. This editorial team had an insight into the agreement.

SRF apologizes and deletes article

SRF undertakes to delete the news contribution that led to the legal dispute from all databases and media vessels (including Swiss media database SMD). This also includes critical passages that were not the subject of the criminal orders. The report was no longer found on Friday last week. In addition, as part of the agreement, SRF removed an indication of a possible addition to the deleted article from a contribution that deals with punitive orders and source protection. The statement that SRF continues to be reported is not affected by the deletion.

SRF also undertakes to never give the impression that Yousuf makes “suspicious and/or questionable transactions that are related to fraud, terrorist finance or the warring parties Russia and Ukraine,“ as the public prosecutor’s office has held on the basis of the assessed facts ”.

The editor -in -chief Audio/Digital also apologizes in a short and confidential letter for the personality injury determined according to criminal orders.

Both parties also undertake not to proceed against each other in this matter. While Yousuf promises to withdraw his criminal complaint and not to make use of his consent, SRF waives criminal steps in connection with alleged injuries that the two authors of the SRF contribution had suffered from unknown persons. It is about anonymous emails, from which Yousuf always distanced itself.

Increased confidentiality

But as soon as the ink is dry under the agreement, Yousuf heats up the conflict. It makes the content of the agreement public in a media release, although a confidentiality clause prohibits this. Both parties agreed to keep silent about conclusion, existence and content of the comparison « . The SRF’s apology, which became known in particular, is proven with a conventional penalty of CHF 10,000.

«A comparison must not be a means of covering up. When public service media make serious mistakes, endanger the existence and violate journalistic standards, the public is entitled to complete transparency, »writes Yousuf in a media release. He decided to break the confidentiality clause on principle.

Swiss television, on the other hand, adheres to the clause. « SRF does not comment on this case, » says a spokeswoman. In the agreement, however, SRF reserves the right to rewind the deleted article in the event of a violation of the confidentiality clause, « to avoid false impressions of the authorized error content of the article ». So it could be that the dispute starts again.

Yousuf expects another message soon. The Bernese public prosecutor will soon tell him whether it will file charges against him or hire the procedure. For three years, she has been investigating suspicion of commercial fraud and embezzlement. He denies the allegations examined.