100+ Free Fachanwalt SAV Strafrecht Practice Questions

Prepare for the Fachanwalt SAV Strafrecht / Avocat spécialiste FSA en droit pénal exam with instant access — no signup required.

✓ No registration✓ No credit card✓ No hidden fees✓ Start practicing immediately

100+ Questions

100% Free

Loading practice questions...

Same family resources

Explore More Swiss SAV/FSA Specialist Attorney Qualifications (Fachanwalt SAV)

Continue into nearby exams from the same family. Each card keeps practice questions, study guides, flashcards, videos, and articles in one place.

2026 Statistics

Key Facts: Fachanwalt SAV Strafrecht Exam

Examination Format

Examining Body

Title Fee

Prerequisites

Continuing Education

Governing Codes

The Fachanwalt SAV Strafrecht certification is Switzerland's highest professional qualification for criminal defense specialists, awarded by the Swiss Bar Association (SAV / FSA). The official examination consists of a written specialist examination of 3 to 5 hours and an oral Fachgespräch. This English-language study bank provides 100 performance-aligned practice MCQs with detailed statutory rationales and Federal Supreme Court case-law references.

Sample Fachanwalt SAV Strafrecht Practice Questions

Try these sample questions to test your Fachanwalt SAV Strafrecht exam readiness. Each question includes a detailed explanation. Start the interactive quiz above for the full 100+ question experience with AI tutoring.

1A cantonal criminal court convicts a defendant for an act not explicitly defined as an offense in the Swiss Criminal Code (StGB), arguing that the behavior is morally reprehensible and closely analogous to an existing statutory misdemeanor. On appeal, defense counsel challenges the conviction. Which fundamental principle of Swiss criminal law has the court violated?

A.The principle of accelerated proceedings (Art. 5 StPO).

B.The principle of legality (Art. 1 StGB / nullum crimen, nulla poena sine lege) and the strict prohibition of customary law and analogy in malam partem.

C.The principle of mandatory prosecution (Art. 7 StPO / Legalitätsprinzip in criminal procedure).

D.The principle of territoriality regarding extraterritorial offenses (Art. 3 StGB).

Explanation: Art. 1 StGB enshrines the principle of legality (nullum crimen, nulla poena sine lege): no one may be punished for an act that is not expressly declared to be an offense by law prior to its commission. Under established Swiss Federal Supreme Court jurisprudence, this principle strictly prohibits creating new criminal offenses or aggravating existing ones through judicial analogy (*Analogieverbot in malam partem*) or unwritten customary law.

2A defendant committed an act in 2023 when the statutory maximum penalty was 3 years imprisonment. In 2025, before the final first-instance judgment is rendered, the Swiss parliament amends the relevant StGB provision, reducing the maximum penalty to a monetary penalty (Geldstrafe). According to Art. 2 Abs. 2 StGB, which law must the court apply?

A.The new, more lenient law of 2025 (Lex Mitior principle), because the judgment is rendered after the entry into force of the new legislation.

B.The old law of 2023 exclusively, because the temporal scope of criminal law is strictly determined by the law in force at the time of the commission of the act (Tatzeitrecht).

C.The judge must request a preliminary ruling from the Federal Supreme Court to determine which legislative intent takes precedence.

D.The old law applies to culpability, but the new law applies only if the public prosecutor consents in writing.

Explanation: Art. 2 Abs. 2 StGB establishes the *Lex Mitior* exception to the non-retroactivity principle: if the law in force at the time of the judgment is more lenient to the offender than the law in force at the time the offense was committed, the new law must be applied (*lex mitior*). Since the 2025 amendment replaces imprisonment with a monetary penalty, it is more favorable and must govern sentencing.

3A perpetrator standing on French territory fires a rifle across the border, striking and fatally wounding a victim who is standing in Geneva, Switzerland. Under Art. 8 Abs. 1 StGB, does Swiss criminal jurisdiction apply to this offense?

A.No, because the physical act of shooting occurred entirely outside Swiss sovereign territory.

B.No, unless France formally waives criminal jurisdiction and transfers the proceedings under the European Convention on the Transfer of Proceedings.

C.Yes, because under the Principle of Ubiquity (Ubiquitätsprinzip, Art. 8 Abs. 1 StGB), a felony is deemed committed both where the perpetrator acted and where the statutory result occurred.

D.Yes, but only if the victim is a Swiss citizen and the perpetrator subsequently enters Switzerland voluntarily.

Explanation: Art. 8 Abs. 1 StGB codifies the Principle of Ubiquity (Ubiquitätsprinzip): an offense is deemed to have been committed at the place where the perpetrator performed the act or omitted an action they had a duty to perform, as well as at the place where the statutory result of the offense occurred (*Erfolgsort*). Because the fatal injury and death occurred in Geneva, Swiss criminal jurisdiction is established under Art. 3 Abs. 1 in conjunction with Art. 8 Abs. 1 StGB.

4During a nighttime burglary, a suspect throws a heavy iron crowbar from a third-floor window into a dark courtyard where he knows security guards frequently patrol. He does not specifically desire to hit anyone, but recognizes that hitting a guard is highly probable and thinks: 'If I hit someone, so be it, I need to escape.' The crowbar strikes a guard, causing severe injuries. How is the suspect's subjective culpability classified under Art. 12 Abs. 2 StGB?

A.Unconscious negligence (Unbewusste Fahrlässigkeit), because he did not consciously focus on the guard's exact location.

B.Conscious negligence (Bewusste Fahrlässigkeit / Luxuria), because he did not explicitly aim the crowbar at the guard.

C.Strict liability (Kausalhaftung), because throwing objects from buildings is inherently dangerous under Swiss tort law.

D.Conditional intent (Eventualvorsatz / Dolus Eventualis), because he considered the realization of the offense possible and accepted/reconciled with it (*Inkaufnahme*).

Explanation: Under Art. 12 Abs. 2 StGB, a person acts with intent (Vorsatz) if they carry out the act with knowledge and will. A person acts with conditional intent (*Eventualvorsatz*) if they consider the realization of the statutory offense possible and accept/reconcile themselves with this outcome (*in Kauf nehmen / billigen*). The suspect recognized the substantial risk of hitting a guard and accepted this consequence in order to secure his escape.

5In landmark jurisprudence regarding the boundary between conditional intent (Eventualvorsatz) and conscious negligence (bewusste Fahrlässigkeit, e.g., BGE 133 IV 9, BGE 130 IV 58), what is the decisive criterion established by the Swiss Federal Supreme Court (Bundesgericht)?

A.Whether the perpetrator reconciled themselves with the realization of the statutory elements (*Inkaufnahme*) or whether they genuinely and trustingly relied on the outcome not occurring (*Vertrauen auf das Ausbleiben des Erfolgs*).

B.Whether the statutory offense carries a minimum custodial sentence of more than one year.

C.Whether the perpetrator possessed a prior criminal record for violent offenses.

D.Whether the victim actively warned the perpetrator immediately prior to the commission of the dangerous act.

Explanation: According to established Federal Supreme Court jurisprudence (BGE 133 IV 9, BGE 130 IV 58), both *Eventualvorsatz* and conscious negligence share the cognitive element (knowledge of the risk). The decisive distinction lies in the volitive element: the perpetrator acting with *Eventualvorsatz* accepts and reconciles themselves with the realization of the prohibited result (*Inkaufnahme*), whereas the consciously negligent actor recognizes the risk but earnestly and unjustifiably trusts that the harmful result will not materialize.

6An architect fails to verify the load-bearing calculations of a temporary balcony structure despite clear industry standards (SIA norms) requiring dual verification. The balcony collapses during an event, injuring several guests. Under Art. 12 Abs. 3 StGB, what are the cumulative statutory elements required to establish criminal negligence?

A.Direct intention combined with malice and financial enrichment motives.

B.A breach of a duty of care (pflichtwidrige Unvorsichtigkeit) through failure to exercise the care required under the circumstances and personal capabilities, where the harmful outcome was foreseeable and avoidable.

C.Gross recklessness equivalent to murder under Art. 112 StGB.

D.Strict breach of public safety regulations regardless of whether the specific collapse was individual foreseeable.

Explanation: Art. 12 Abs. 3 StGB defines negligence: a person commits a felony or misdemeanor through negligence if they fail to exercise the care required of them by the circumstances and by their personal capabilities, thereby failing to realize or ignoring that their conduct could produce the prohibited result (*pflichtwidrige Unvorsichtigkeit*). Criminal liability requires a breach of an established duty of care (such as professional SIA standards), natural and adequate causation, as well as individual foreseeability (*Voraussehbarkeit*) and avoidability (*Vermeidbarkeit*).

7A hunter in an authorized hunting area fires at what he genuinely believes to be a wild boar moving behind bushes in twilight. In reality, it is a fellow hunter wearing dark camouflage clothing, who is severely injured by the gunshot. How does the court treat the shooter's liability under Art. 13 StGB (Error of Fact / Sachverhaltsirrtum)?

A.The hunter must be convicted of intentional grievous bodily harm (Art. 122 StGB), because ignorance of the target is never an excuse.

B.The hunter is completely immune from all criminal prosecution because hunting carries inherent risks.

C.The court assesses the act based on the facts assumed by the hunter (i.e., shooting an animal); however, if the mistake was avoidable through due care, he is liable for negligent bodily harm (Art. 125 StGB).

D.The hunter is guilty of an unavoidable error of law under Art. 21 StGB and must be unconditionally acquitted.

Explanation: Under Art. 13 Abs. 1 StGB (Sachverhaltsirrtum), if the perpetrator acts under a mistaken assumption regarding the factual circumstances, the court must judge the act according to the facts as the perpetrator believed them to be (subjective assumption). Since shooting a wild boar is not a human bodily injury offense, intent is excluded. However, under Art. 13 Abs. 2 StGB, if the perpetrator could have avoided the error by exercising due care, they remain punishable for negligence if the negligent commission of the offense is penalised by law (here: Art. 125 StGB).

8A foreign national moves to Switzerland and operates an unlicensed commercial gambling establishment. When prosecuted under the Gambling Act (BGS) and StGB, he argues that commercial gambling was legal in his home country and that he did not know it was prohibited in Switzerland. According to Art. 21 StGB and Federal Supreme Court practice on Error of Law (Rechtsirrtum), how must the court rule?

A.An error of law is only excusable if the perpetrator had sufficient reasons to believe they were acting lawfully and could not have avoided the error even by exercising all reasonable diligence; here, the error was clearly avoidable, so culpability remains (though sentence may be mitigated under Art. 48a StGB).

B.Ignorance of the law is an absolute defense under Art. 21 StGB, requiring an immediate acquittal.

C.The court must convict the defendant of negligence only, as intent is negated by any subjective legal misunderstanding.

D.Errors of law only apply to violent offenses, not economic or regulatory criminal provisions.

Explanation: Under Art. 21 StGB (Rechtsirrtum), a person who is unaware that their act is unlawful does not act culpably only if the error could not have been avoided (*unvermeidbarer Rechtsirrtum*). The Federal Supreme Court applies an extremely strict standard: anyone engaging in a commercial or regulated activity has a duty to inform themselves of applicable Swiss laws. If the error was avoidable (*vermeidbarer Rechtsirrtum*), the act remains intentional and punishable, but the court mitigates the sentence pursuant to Art. 48a StGB.

9A person is walking in a park when an armed robber brandishes a knife, lunges forward, and threatens to stab them unless they hand over their wallet. The person immediately strikes the attacker with a heavy walking cane, fracturing the attacker's wrist and disarming him. Which statutory defense under the Swiss Criminal Code justifies the defender's action?

A.Exculpatory necessity (Entschuldbarer Notstand, Art. 18 StGB).

B.Putative self-defense (Putativnotwehr, Art. 13 StGB).

C.Consent of the injured party (Einwilligung des Verletzten).

D.Legitimate self-defense (Rechtfertigende Notwehr, Art. 15 StGB).

Explanation: Art. 15 StGB (Rechtfertigende Notwehr) provides that if a person is unlawfully attacked or immediately threatened with an unlawful attack, the person attacked and any other person are entitled to fend off the attack by means proportionate to the circumstances (*angemessene Abwehr*). Striking the armed attacker with a cane to disarm an immediate, life-threatening knife attack satisfies the proportionality and immediacy requirements of legitimate self-defense.

10A shopkeeper is confronted at night by an aggressive, unarmed shoplifter who pushes him backwards. In a state of overwhelming terror, panic, and mortal fear (asthenic affect), the shopkeeper grabs a handgun from behind the counter and shoots the shoplifter, causing life-threatening injuries. How does Art. 16 Abs. 2 StGB treat this excessive self-defense (Notwehrexzess)?

A.The shopkeeper must be sentenced to a mandatory minimum of 5 years imprisonment for intentional attempted homicide without exception.

B.If the perpetrator exceeded the limits of self-defense in an excusable state of excitement, panic, or terror caused by the attack (*asthenischer Affekt*), he does not act culpably (*handelt nicht schuldhaft*) and is not punishable.

C.The shopkeeper is fully punishable because firearms may never be used against unarmed attackers under Swiss law.

D.The shopkeeper is liable for a petty administrative contravention (Ordnungsbusse) of CHF 250.

Explanation: Under Art. 16 Abs. 2 StGB (Excusable self-defense excess / *Entschuldbarer Notwehrexzess*), if the defender exceeds the limits of self-defense because of an excusable state of excitement, panic, or terror caused by the attack (*asthenischer Affekt* like mortal fear or extreme confusion), the law provides that they do not act culpably and are not punishable (*straflos*). In contrast, sthenic affects like rage or revenge only allow sentence mitigation under Art. 16 Abs. 1 StGB.

About the Fachanwalt SAV Strafrecht Exam

The title 'Fachanwalt SAV Strafrecht' (Avocat spécialiste FSA en droit pénal / Avvocato specialista FSA diritto penale) is the premier specialist certification for criminal law practitioners in Switzerland, established and governed by the Swiss Bar Association (Schweizerischer Anwaltsverband / SAV / FSA). To attain the title, an attorney must possess a valid Swiss cantonal bar license, demonstrate at least 5 years of dedicated legal practice with extensive, proven courtroom and defense experience in criminal matters, complete the demanding accredited specialist training curriculum (~at least 120 hours including the examination), and pass both a comprehensive written specialist examination of 3 to 5 hours and an in-depth oral examination (Fachgespräch) administered by the SAV Fachkommission Strafrecht. The curriculum covers the entire spectrum of Swiss criminal jurisprudence: the Swiss Criminal Code (StGB / CP SR 311.0) General and Special Parts (including complex economic crimes, fraud, document forgery, and money laundering), the Swiss Criminal Procedure Code (StPO / CPP SR 312.0) with acute emphasis on coercive measures, detention litigation before the Compulsory Measures Court (ZMG), sealing proceedings (Siegelung und Entsiegelung Art. 248), and exclusionary rules (Beweisverwertungsverbote Art. 140/141), as well as defense participation rights (Art. 147), summary penalty order challenges (Strafbefehl), accelerated proceedings (abgekürztes Verfahren), cantonal appellate remedies (Berufung/Beschwerde), Federal Supreme Court appeals (BGG Art. 78 ff.), Juvenile Criminal Law (JStG), Road Traffic offenses (SVG), and International Mutual Legal Assistance (IRSG). This question bank is an English-language MCQ study adaptation developed to enable candidates and international practitioners to master Swiss criminal law principles, statutory mechanics, and landmark Federal Supreme Court (BGer) rulings.

Assessment

Performance-based assessment

Time Limit

3 to 5 hours (written specialist examination) + 30 to 60 min (Oral Fachgespräch)

Passing Score

Pass/Fail (Evaluated by the SAV Fachkommission Strafrecht)

Exam Fee

CHF 1,800 title & exam fee (Schweizerischer Anwaltsverband (SAV / FSA) / Fachkommission Strafrecht)

Fachanwalt SAV Strafrecht Exam Content Outline

25%

General Criminal Law & Culpability (StGB Art. 1–110)

Examines core foundational doctrines under the Swiss Criminal Code General Part: the legality principle (nullum crimen sine lege, prohibition of analogy, lex mitior Art. 1–2), territorial and temporal application (ubiquity principle Art. 8), forms of culpability (Vorsatz, Eventualvorsatz, conscious vs unconscious negligence Art. 12), errors of fact and law (Sachverhaltsirrtum Art. 13, Rechtsirrtum Art. 21), justification grounds (self-defense Art. 15, excusable excess Art. 16, necessity Art. 17–18), perpetration and participation (co-perpetration, instigation Art. 24, aiding and abetting Art. 25), attempt and active repentance (Art. 22–23), penalties (monetary penalty daily unit calculation Art. 34, custodial sentences, suspended/partially suspended sentences Art. 42–43), therapeutic measures and indefinite incarceration (Art. 56–65), and sentencing methodology (Art. 47–50).

25%

Special Offenses: Violent, Property & Economic Crimes

Focuses on high-frequency and complex statutory offenses under the StGB Special Part: homicide offenses (intentional homicide Art. 111, murder Art. 112, passion homicide Art. 113, homicide on request Art. 114, assisted suicide Art. 115), assault and endangerment (grievous bodily harm Art. 122, endangering life Art. 129, brawling Art. 133), property offenses (theft Art. 139, embezzlement Art. 138, robbery Art. 140, extortion Art. 156), white-collar and financial crimes (fraud Art. 146 and the doctrine of Arglist, unfaithful business management Art. 158, bankruptcy offenses), document forgery (Urkundenfälschung Art. 251: material vs intellectual forgery), money laundering (Art. 305bis: qualifying predicate felonies and evasion acts), and public/private corruption offenses (Art. 322ter ff.).

25%

Criminal Procedure: Investigation & Coercive Measures (StPO)

Detailed mastery of the Swiss Criminal Procedure Code (StPO SR 312.0) during preliminary proceedings: constitutional principles (nemo tenetur, in dubio pro reo, fair trial, accusatorial principle), opening of formal investigations (Art. 309 StPO), coercive measures (Zwangsmassnahmen Art. 196 ff.), provisional arrest (Art. 217), pre-trial detention (Untersuchungshaft) and preventative detention (Sicherheitshaft) under Art. 221 (substantiating flight, collusion, and reoffending risks), detention hearings and judicial review by the Compulsory Measures Court (Zwangsmassnahmengericht / ZMG Art. 224–228), substitute measures (Art. 237), house searches and physical/electronic seizures, sealing requests and unsealing proceedings (Siegelung und Entsiegelung Art. 248), covert surveillance (Art. 269 ff.), and evidence exclusionary rules (Beweisverwertungsverbote Art. 140/141 StPO, relative vs absolute invalidity, fruit of poisonous tree).

15%

Defense Rights, Special Procedures & Appeals (StPO & BGG)

Practical defense representation and procedural escalation: mandatory defense requirements (Art. 130 StPO) and public defense appointments (Art. 132 StPO), party participation rights during witness, expert, and co-accused interrogations (Art. 147 StPO and consequences of breach), summary penalty order procedure (Strafbefehlsverfahren Art. 352–356, strict 10-day objection deadline Art. 354), accelerated proceedings (abgekürztes Verfahren Art. 358–362, plea agreement negotiation and judicial scrutiny), cantonal appeal on the merits (Berufung Art. 398 ff., scope of review, reformatio in peius prohibition Art. 391 Abs. 2), cantonal procedural complaint (Beschwerde Art. 393 ff.), revision (Art. 410 ff.), and criminal appeals to the Swiss Federal Supreme Court (Beschwerde in Strafsachen an das Bundesgericht, BGG Art. 78 ff.).

10%

Juvenile, Road Traffic & International Criminal Law

Covers specialized and ancillary criminal law domains: Juvenile Criminal Law (JStG & JStPO: primacy of protective measures over penal sanctions, maximum custodial terms, mediation), Road Traffic criminal law (SVG Art. 90 simple and gross violations, Art. 90 Abs. 3/4 high-speed Raserdelikte thresholds and mandatory sanctions, Art. 91 driving in an unfit state/DUI), Narcotics Act (BetmG Art. 19/19a: baseline trafficking vs qualified cases under Art. 19 Abs. 2 based on purity quantities and organized crime, personal consumption exceptions), and International Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters (IRSG SR 351.1: extradition requirements, dual criminality, political offense exclusion, specialty rule, and cross-border evidence transmission).

How to Pass the Fachanwalt SAV Strafrecht Exam

What You Need to Know

Passing score: Pass/Fail (Evaluated by the SAV Fachkommission Strafrecht)
Assessment: Performance-based assessment
Time limit: 3 to 5 hours (written specialist examination) + 30 to 60 min (Oral Fachgespräch)
Exam fee: CHF 1,800 title & exam fee

Keys to Passing

Work through all 100 available questions
Review every answer and explanation
Track weak areas and revisit them
Use our AI tutor for tough concepts

Fachanwalt SAV Strafrecht Study Tips from Top Performers

1Master Eventualvorsatz vs conscious negligence: Thoroughly review landmark Federal Supreme Court decisions (BGE) distinguishing dolus eventualis (reconciling with the result / Inkaufnahme) from conscious negligence (unjustified confidence in avoidance).

2Memorize detention timelines and thresholds: Know the exact 24/48-hour detention clock from provisional arrest (Art. 217 StPO) to ZMG submission (Art. 224 StPO) and ZMG decision (Art. 226 StPO), and the statutory bars for flight, collusion, and reoffending risks (Art. 221 StPO).

3Understand the mechanics of sealing (Siegelung StPO 248): Remember that sealing must be requested immediately at the time of search/seizure or within the statutory period, and the prosecutor must petition the ZMG for unsealing within 20 days.

4Distinguish exclusionary rules (StPO Art. 140 vs 141): Art. 140 violations (prohibited interrogation methods) create absolute, incurable inadmissibility. Art. 141 Abs. 2 violations of validity provisions are unusable unless strictly indispensable for solving serious offenses.

5Know summary penalty order (Strafbefehl) objection deadlines: The 10-day objection deadline under Art. 354 StPO is strict, absolute, and non-extendable; missing it renders the penalty order a final and executable judgment.

6Understand qualified thresholds under SVG and BetmG: Memorize the exact speed excess thresholds for Raserdelikte (SVG Art. 90 Abs. 3/4) and the statutory purity thresholds for narcotics (BetmG Art. 19 Abs. 2: 18g cocaine, 12g heroin, 4g amphetamine, 36g MDMA).

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the Fachanwalt SAV Strafrecht specialist title?

The Fachanwalt SAV Strafrecht (Avocat spécialiste FSA en droit pénal / Avvocato specialista FSA diritto penale) is a postgraduate certification awarded by the Swiss Bar Association (SAV / FSA). It certifies that a licensed Swiss attorney has acquired recognized specialized expertise, extensive practical courtroom experience, and advanced theoretical knowledge in criminal defense and criminal procedure.

What are the formal admission prerequisites for the SAV specialist title in criminal law?

Candidates must hold an active Swiss attorney license (Anwaltspatent), have practiced law as a registered attorney for at least 5 years, submit a verified portfolio demonstrating extensive defense/representation in complex criminal cases, complete an accredited SAV specialist course (~120–150 lecture hours), and pass both the written specialist examination of 3 to 5 hours and the oral Fachgespräch.

What format is used for the official SAV Fachanwalt Strafrecht examination?

The official assessment consists of two parts: a written specialist examination of 3 to 5 hours where candidates analyze an authentic, complex criminal case file (drafting tactical defense briefs, detention motions, or appellate pleadings) and a 30 to 60 minute structured oral colloquium (Fachgespräch) before the SAV Fachkommission Strafrecht evaluating substantive law, procedural tactics, BGer case law, and professional ethics.

What fees are associated with the Fachanwalt SAV Strafrecht qualification?

The SAV/FSA charges a fee of CHF 1,800 for the examination and title conferral. The preparatory postgraduate specialist course (Fachanwaltskurs Strafrecht), organized by university law faculties in cooperation with the SAV, typically costs approximately CHF 12,000 to CHF 14,000.

What are the ongoing obligations to maintain the Fachanwalt SAV title?

To maintain the specialist title, certified attorneys must remain registered in a cantonal attorneys' register, continuously practice in criminal law, and fulfill mandatory annual continuing legal education (Fortbildungspflicht) requirements (at least 10 hours of certified criminal law training per year), subject to periodic audit by the SAV Fachkommission.