Civil society letter addresses proposed revisions to Swiss data retention rules

A group of international and European civil society organisations has raised concerns about proposed revisions to the Swiss Ordinance on the Surveillance of Post and Telecommunications Traffic (VÜPF). In an open letter addressed to Federal Councillor Beat Jans, the organisations argue that the draft ordinance would significantly expand the general and indiscriminate retention of telecommunications and internet traffic data, with far-reaching consequences for fundamental rights.

In simple terms, data retention rules require phone and internet service providers to store information about users’ communications, such as who contacted whom, when, and from where. Although this does not usually include the content of messages, the metadata can still reveal detailed patterns about people’s lives. The organisations warn that extending these obligations to a broader range of service providers, and for larger volumes of data, would amount to mass surveillance of the entire population rather than targeted measures linked to specific investigations.

The letter argues that such indiscriminate retention conflicts with established European legal standards. It refers to case law from the Court of Justice of the European Union, which has ruled that blanket data retention violates the rights to privacy and data protection because it applies to everyone, regardless of suspicion. The authors note that Swiss courts have previously recognised the relevance of this jurisprudence to Switzerland. They also point to rulings of the European Court of Human Rights, which require surveillance measures to be necessary, proportionate, and subject to strong safeguards and independent oversight.

Beyond privacy, the organisations highlight what they describe as a ‘chilling effect’ on other fundamental freedoms. If people feel that their communications are constantly monitored and that anonymous communication is no longer possible, they may be less willing to express opinions, seek information, or associate freely. According to the letter, this is particularly harmful for journalists, lawyers, activists, and human rights defenders, for whom confidentiality and secure communication are essential.

The draft ordinance is also criticised for weakening procedural safeguards. The organisations note that it would allow access to certain subscriber data and IP addresses without prior judicial authorisation and would require automatic execution of law enforcement requests. They argue that this reduces protections against arbitrary or abusive access to personal data and runs counter to European human rights standards.

Another concern raised is cybersecurity. Requiring a large number of service providers to retain sensitive data about all users would, according to the letter, create attractive targets for cyberattacks. Data breaches in the telecommunications sector could expose large amounts of personal information, affecting not only individuals but also businesses and public institutions.

The letter further warns that the proposed changes could put Switzerland’s data protection “adequacy” status with the European Union at risk. This status allows personal data to flow freely from the EU to Switzerland. If Swiss surveillance laws are seen as going beyond what is strictly necessary and proportionate, the EU could reconsider this decision, with implications for trade and cross-border data flows.

Finally, the organisations argue that less intrusive alternatives already exist. Instead of blanket data retention, they point to targeted measures such as preservation orders, sometimes called ‘quick-freeze’ mechanisms, which allow data to be retained for specific investigations under judicial control without subjecting the entire population to surveillance.

The open letter calls on the Swiss government to substantially amend the draft ordinance and align it with the highest standards set by European courts. The signatories state that they remain available to engage in dialogue to find solutions that meet legitimate public interest objectives while respecting fundamental rights.

The letter is signed by the following organisations:

• Amnesty International Switzerland
• AlgorithmWatch (Germany)
• AlgorithmWatch CH (Switzerland)
• Bits of Freedom (Netherlands)
• Digitalcourage (Germany)
• Digitale Gesellschaft (Switzerland)
• Digitale Gesellschaft (Germany)
• Electronic Frontier Norway
• epicenter.works – for digital rights (Austria)
• European Digital Rights (EDRi) (International)
• Homo Digitalis (Greece)
• Human Rights Watch (International)
• Initiative für Netzfreiheit (Austria)
• Internet Society – ISOC Switzerland Chapter
• IT-Pol (Denmark)
• Liga voor Mensenrechten (Flemish Human Rights League) (Belgium)
• Open Data CH (Switzerland)
• Privacy International (International)
• Statewatch (International)