Policy
“The Federal Council is a real sieve”
Investigations into violations of official secrecy are increasing in federal Bern. Often with little chance of success.
Posted
When it comes to leaks under the dome, sometimes politicians protect each other.
afp
“The Federal Council is a real sieve”. This is how Cédric Wermuth, the co-president of the Swiss Socialist Party (PS), commented on the airwaves of the German-speaking radio station SRF on the accumulation of indiscretions in the government. And he’s not entirely wrong. The Federal Public Prosecutor’s Office (MPC) revealed to the “NZZ am Sonntag” that investigations into breaches of official secrecy were increasing sharply in federal Bern. “The number of procedures jumped by around 40% between 2021 and 2022,” writes an MPC spokesperson. According to the Federal Prosecutor’s Office, around forty investigations of this type were opened between the beginning of 2020 and the end of 2022.
Different institutions are involved. “This includes public institutions owned by the state, the various federal departments and offices, parliament and parliamentary committees.” State Councilor Andrea Caroni (PLR / AR) believes, however, that the chances of conviction are low. “There is a lack of political will to effectively change the system. The offense is not considered serious enough to provide the Federal Prosecutor’s Office with effective tools, deplores the lawyer. For example, parliamentarians suspected of divulging secrets of a parliamentary committee cannot be wiretapped. And on the media side, source protection covers everything from ordinary gossip to state secrets.”
While investigations often fail because of protecting sources, sometimes politicians protect each other. As was the case in the case of the National Councilor Roger Koeppel (UDC/ZH). The boss of the “Weltwoche” was suspected of having made public on his video channel confidential documents of the Foreign Policy Commission, but the responsible commission of the Council of States decided not to lift his immunity and the investigation did not never started. “The doubt benefits the accused”: this is how Roger Köppel’s colleagues justified their decision.
(cle)