Take-Aways (AI)
  • Artic­le 293 SCC vio­la­tes free­dom of the media and free­dom of expres­si­on and is con­tra­ry to Artic­le 10 ECHR and rele­vant case law.
  • The legis­la­tor should repeal Artic­le 293 of the Cri­mi­nal Code, as the stan­dard dis­pro­por­tio­na­te­ly pro­tects for­mal secrets and puts whist­le­b­lo­wers and media pro­fes­sio­nals at a disadvantage.

Sub­mit­ted text

Based on Artic­le 160 para­graph 1 of the Fede­ral Con­sti­tu­ti­on and Artic­le 107 of the Par­lia­men­ta­ry Act, I sub­mit the fol­lo­wing par­lia­men­ta­ry initiative:

Artic­le 293 of the Cri­mi­nal Code (publi­ca­ti­on of offi­ci­al secret pro­ce­e­dings) shall be repealed.

Justi­fi­ca­ti­on

Artic­le 293 of the Penal Code, which has been con­tro­ver­si­al for deca­des, rest­ricts media free­dom, con­tra­dicts Artic­le 10 of the ECHR (free­dom of expres­si­on) and the Good­win decis­i­on of the Euro­pean Court of Human Rights of March 27, 1996 (pro­tec­tion of whist­le­b­lo­wers), which is based on it. In a report on various pro­ce­e­dings against media pro­fes­sio­nals and a cri­ti­cal let­ter from the OSCE, the “NZZ” of Febru­ary 4, 2006, under the tit­le “Punish­ment for the mes­sen­ger of the news,” sta­ted: “To date, no renow­ned media or cri­mi­nal law expert can be heard spea­king out in favor of retai­ning the punish­ment norm.”

The Fede­ral Coun­cil its­elf had justi­fi­ed the aboli­ti­on of Artic­le 293 SCC in its dis­patch on the amend­ment of the SCC and the MStG of 17 June 1996 with the fol­lo­wing argu­ments: “Artic­le 293 pro­tects only for­mal secrets, i.e. facts that have been declared secret by law or by a simp­le decis­i­on. It also seems objec­tionable that the third par­ty who has fur­ther dis­se­mi­na­ted the secret is con­vic­ted, while the offi­ci­al or par­lia­men­ta­ri­an who has bro­ken the secret often escapes pro­se­cu­ti­on … in the case of actu­al sta­te secrets and mili­ta­ry secrets … the cur­rent law, inde­pendent­ly of Artic­le 293 SCC, pro­vi­des for dou­ble pro­tec­tion any­way.” Alt­hough the majo­ri­ty of the Natio­nal Coun­cil com­mit­tee fol­lo­wed the Fede­ral Coun­cil, the repeal fai­led in the Natio­nal Coun­cil (March 19, 1997) and in the Coun­cil of Sta­tes (June 12, 1997) – albeit by an extre­me­ly nar­row margin.

On August 18, 2011, the Fede­ral Cri­mi­nal Court acquit­ted a jour­na­list from “Sonn­tag” on the grounds that the secret he had made public was of minor importance. The Fed­pol docu­ment on the Ramos case had been wron­gly clas­si­fi­ed as secret. As plea­sing as this acquit­tal was, it remains unp­lea­sant that the judge avo­ided a fun­da­men­tal dis­cus­sion of Artic­le 293 SCC. It is up to the legis­la­tu­re to repeal the artic­le, which was descri­bed by then Fede­ral Pre­si­dent Arnold Kol­ler as an “old braid”.