Moti­on Addor (20.3367): No to moni­to­ring the cus­to­mers of publicly acce­s­si­ble faci­li­ties and businesses!

Moti­on Addor (20.3367): No to moni­to­ring the cus­to­mers of publicly acce­s­si­ble faci­li­ties and businesses!

Sub­mit­ted text

The Fede­ral Coun­cil is ins­truc­ted to enact all neces­sa­ry pro­vi­si­ons to ensu­re that the publicly acce­s­si­ble Pre­vent insti­tu­ti­ons and busi­nesses from syste­ma­ti­cal­ly con­trol­ling the iden­ti­ties of their cus­to­mers, and to stop the­se acti­vi­ties imme­dia­te­ly if necessary.


Under the gui­se of com­ba­ting the Covid 19 pan­de­mic, by sheer decree of the Direc­tor of the Fede­ral Office of Public Health, a com­pre­hen­si­ve Recor­ding the loca­ti­on data of Swis­s­com cus­to­mers arranged.

Mean­while, the­re is talk of a second step toward elec­tro­nic mass sur­veil­lan­ce, name­ly a Smart­phone appwhich some accu­ra­te­ly refer to as “Gesta­po app” is designated.

Com­bi­ned with the fact that it is now lear­ned that the reope­ning of the restau­rant busi­nesses could be made depen­dent on the fact that the ope­ra­tors, again under the gui­se of fight­ing the coro­na virus, be obli­ged to syste­ma­ti­cal­ly record the iden­ti­ty of their gue­sts and to sub­se­quent­ly trans­fer the data to the health aut­ho­ri­ties wit­hout (and this is still put­ting it mild­ly) the con­di­ti­ons for the coll­ec­tion and the ana­ly­sis of the­se data being clear, wit­hout this being in line with the Data pro­tec­tion law and wit­hout suf­fi­ci­ent legal basis.

This mea­su­re could jeo­par­di­ze the reope­ning of the restau­rants, as cus­to­mers are not wil­ling to be moni­to­red by the ope­ra­tors of the­se estab­lish­ments, who are being tur­ned into agents of a new kind of Sta­si against their will, and it offends the population.

This mea­su­re must the­r­e­fo­re be pre­ven­ted or, if neces­sa­ry, stop­ped immediately.

State­ment of the Fede­ral Coun­cil of 19.8.20

Cont­act tra­cing is a cen­tral ele­ment in the con­trol of the new coro­na­vi­rus. A pre­re­qui­si­te for the rela­xa­ti­on steps deci­ded by the Fede­ral Coun­cil was the­r­e­fo­re the recor­ding of cont­act data in case distance rules and bar­ri­er mea­su­res can­not be imple­men­ted. This should ensu­re that cont­acts can be tra­ced in the event of a posi­ti­ve case (cont­act tracing).

Sin­ce June 22, 2020, all ope­ra­tors of publicly acce­s­si­ble faci­li­ties and ope­ra­ti­ons must pro­vi­de in their pro­tec­tion con­cept for the coll­ec­tion of cont­act data if, due to the natu­re of the acti­vi­ty, local con­di­ti­ons, or ope­ra­tio­nal or eco­no­mic rea­sons, neither the requi­red distance is main­tai­ned nor pro­tec­ti­ve mea­su­res are taken for a cer­tain peri­od of time (Art. 4 of the Covid-19 Ordi­nan­ce Spe­cial Situa­ti­on SR 818.101.26).

The Fede­ral Coun­cil is awa­re of the efforts it requi­res of ever­yo­ne to com­bat the coro­na­vi­rus epi­de­mic. The sole pur­po­se of requi­ring faci­li­ty ope­ra­tors to coll­ect cus­to­mer cont­act data is to coun­ter­act a fur­ther signi­fi­cant increa­se in the num­ber of cases, which would be dis­astrous from both a health and eco­no­mic per­spec­ti­ve. The pro­tec­tion of cus­to­mers against the misu­se of their data was taken into account in the Covid-19 regu­la­ti­on spe­cial situa­ti­on, accor­ding to which the coll­ec­ted Cont­act details not used for any other pur­po­se be allo­wed and Destroy­ed 14 days after the visit to the faci­li­ty (Art. 5 para. 3 of the Covid 19 Regu­la­ti­on spe­cial situa­ti­on). This imple­ments the data pro­tec­tion and human rights requi­re­ments for the pro­tec­tion of infor­ma­tio­nal self-deter­mi­na­ti­on pur­su­ant to Art. 13 para. 2 of the Fede­ral Con­sti­tu­ti­on (SR 101) and Art. 8 of the Euro­pean Con­ven­ti­on on Human Rights (ECHR).




Rela­ted articles