Thousands of signatures have allegedly been forged to initiate votes. The Office of the Attorney General of Switzerland is taking action against commercial signature collectors. The scandal has rocked trust in direct democracy – and strengthened the case for e-collection.
This is far from a few isolated transgressions. It is a shocking case of abusing the system. Entire sheets of signatures were allegedly falsified. This calls into question the legitimacy of popular initiatives, which evidently only came about because of illegal business practices. It also means votes were held that actually should not have taken place. The newspaper “Tages-Anzeiger” reported in September 2024 that signature forgery was suspected to have occurred on a large scale. Companies that collect signatures commercially are in the dock. These professional collectors are mainly used when plans for a popular petition seem destined to fail, i.e. when committees have trouble collecting the required 50,000 or 100,000 signatures within a limited time.
Proponents of a civic duty initiative, for example, enlisted professional support in early 2023. They hired Incop, a Lausanne-based provider. Incop reportedly collected 10,000 signatures in a month in return for 4.50 Swiss francs per signature. However, the committee was disappointed when many of the signatures turned out to be false: 35 to 90 per cent per commune had to be discarded. The ratio of invalid signatures is usually about 10 per cent.
Noémie Roten helped to get the ball rolling – her committee filed a claim for fraud in 2023. Photo: Keystone
Systematic falsification on a large scale
“At first we thought it was just one collector breaking the rules,” said Noémie Roten, co-president of the initiative, in conversation with the “Tages-Anzeiger”. Over time, however, patterns emerged indicating systematic fraud. The names and addresses were usually accurate – they can be taken from post boxes – but the birth dates did not match. Individual persons were entered up to five times and with different handwriting. In June 2023, the committee reported a criminal offence to the Office of the Attorney General of Switzerland. Since then, it has emerged that this was not a one-off: “Signatures have been invented, falsified or copied on a large scale for many other initiatives and referendums.”
In fact, signature creation has become a lucrative business in recent years. Before the pandemic, prices were between 1.50 and 2.50 francs. It has since risen to 7.50 francs per signature, although the collectors receive only a certain proportion of that sum.
It was in 2019 that the authorities first became aware of the possibility that fraud was being committed; suspicious activity was initially detected in the French-speaking part of the country, where a number of these companies are based. The canton of Vaud teamed up with other cantons in the west of Switzerland and turned to the Federal Chancellery (FCh). In 2021, Neuchâtel decided to ban commercial signature collection. After the pandemic, instances of irregularities being reported to the FCh kept growing, including from the German-speaking part of the country.
Daniel Graf of the Foundation for Direct Democracy calls it a “democratic earthquake”. Photo: Keystone
Insider criticises lack of action by the authorities
The signature fraud impacts central instruments of political co-determination. Hence the size of the resulting fallout, with talk of “a politicaldemocratic earthquake” and a “massive loss of confidence”. “The dimensions are shocking”, says Daniel Graf of the Foundation for Direct Democracy. There had been indications of manipulation by commercial firms for some years. “But I assumed they were isolated instances, which – if necessary – would be subject to criminal proceedings.” But the cantonal departments and the FCh missed the chance to combat the misconduct early and effectively.
No results were falsified
The businesspeople involved stand accused of electoral fraud. This is a serious offence and can lead to a fine or a custodial sentence of up to three years. However, the cases in question do not actually involve falsified results. It is possible that popular petitions were illegitimately put to the vote. Nonetheless, the voters had the last word, as ever. “No bill that the people didn’t actually want was accepted,” as political scientist Michael Hermann puts it. No ballot or voting papers were tampered with, so no results were falsified. “That would have been much more serious.”
The current system facilitates fraudulent conduct, argues Rahel Estermann, General Secretary of the Swiss Green Party. “Being paid per signature is a strong incentive to cheat.” All you have to do is write down names from post boxes to earn a lot of money in a few minutes. “It is a problem – and it could be changed by paying an hourly rate, for example.” The real victims of this behaviour becoming public knowledge are those who volunteer to collect signatures. People on the street are now more mistrusting of them. “We used to get 20 to 30 signatures per hour; now, we only get 10 to 15.” Daniel Graf can relate to that. “Many people aren’t sure whether they have signed with an engaged member of the public or a paid collector – and they don’t know what will happen with their data.” When the legal grounds are lacking to fight the abuse effectively, the commercialisation aspect must be banned. “We shouldn’t forget what makes our direct democracy strong: voluntary engagement.”
Self-regulation instead of laws
Politicians have steered clear of a ban until now. The Federal Chancellery now wants to act. It wants to strengthen monitoring and control, is counting on self-regulation and has initiated a permanent exchange among all the parties involved. They are to put together a code of conduct by spring 2025. Parliament will also discuss more stringent requirements for commercial providers, a ban and a duty of disclosure for committees.
Members of parliament across the political spectrum are also proposing the launch of a pilot e-collecting scheme. This would involve using the e-ID trust infrastructure, which will be available for test purposes from 2025. Digital collection can substantially increase security when providing signatures, argues the e-signature camp. “There would be more control over the content,” says Amelle Ako from the civic movement Campax. No more sheets of paper would have to be sent by post and laboriously checked. The whole process would become simpler, argues the campaign boss of Campax. The Federal Council has addressed the opportunities and risks of e-collecting. It wants to enable restricted, practical attempts and has commissioned a pre-project to that end.
This scandal is a boon to those who favour a purely digital solution. “E-collecting can restore faith in the proper application of political rights,” says Ako.
Two ways to reach a popular decision
There are two ways to initiate a nationwide vote in Switzerland; either via popular initiative, or via referendum. A popular initiative is when someone wants to enshrine a new idea in the constitution. This is contingent on collecting 100,000 valid signatures from eligible voters within 18 months. Once this has been done, there is a popular vote. A referendum occurs when someone wishes to amend or repeal a parliamentary decision. This also entails a popular vote. A referendum requires 50,000 signatures within 100 days. (ERU)
Thank you for your comment. Your Comment Added Successfully.
Thank you for your comment. Comments are approved within one to three days.
Oops! Something went wrong, please try again later.
Subscribe to the SwissCommunity newsletter
We thank our partners:
top
Cookie settings
We use cookies on our website. Some of them are technically necessary, while others help us to improve this website or provide additional functionalities.
Comments