Questions and answers What is known so far about the forged signatures

Lead:

Keystone-SDA

10.09.2024, 13:41

10.09.2024, 13:42

SDA

Last week, Tamedia research revealed that thousands of signatures for popular initiatives were allegedly falsified. The media portal spoke of a "signature scam" that has shaken Switzerland. The extent of the forgery cannot be estimated. Various criminal investigations are underway. The reports of suspected cases concern around a dozen federal popular initiatives to varying degrees. However, according to the Federal Chancellery, there is currently no reliable evidence to support the suspicion that votes were held on proposals that did not come about legally.

Were signatures collected without a mandate?

Just over a week after the first reports, the affair has taken on a new twist: According to the Federal Chancellery, certain organizations that collect signatures for money are said to have done so without a mandate and urged committees to purchase these signatures that were not ordered. It is basing this on a criminal complaint about which it has been informed. This could compromise the rights of voters and the integrity of the collection process, the Federal Chancellery wrote. It did not name the organizations, but informed committees of popular initiatives and referendums in the collection stage and assured them of its support.

Who is responsible for verifying valid signatures?

With the exception of the canton of Geneva, the responsibility lies with the municipalities. For each entry, they check whether the person in question is entered in the relevant electoral register on the basis of the information required to establish their identity (surname, first name, address, date of birth).

What is the role of the Federal Chancellery?

It checks the signatures collected and then notifies whether or not a popular initiative or referendum has been successful. After the initiative committee has submitted the signature lists to the Federal Chancellery before the collection deadline, a counting team checks whether the submitted signature lists and voting certificates meet the legal requirements and are therefore valid. The Federal Chancellery is in regular contact with the cantons, communes and committees. According to its own information, the Federal Chancellery has been taking action against possible signature forgeries "for several years".

What does this mean in concrete terms?

The Federal Chancellery itself filed a criminal complaint against persons unknown in 2022 and has added new suspected cases to this complaint several times, as it writes. Since the beginning of the year, the Federal Chancellery has been notified of further cases of conspicuous signature lists in which it is suspected that third parties have filled in and signed the signature lists instead of the registered voters. It is therefore preparing a second criminal complaint. Initially, the focus was on signature lists from municipalities in French-speaking Switzerland, but since last winter there have also been an increasing number of suspicious reports from German-speaking Switzerland.

Are there stronger controls?

Yes, according to the Federal Chancellery, it is carrying out more stringent checks as part of its duties in counting signatures. From now on, it will be subjecting the lists from all cantons to an in-depth check.

Are further measures planned?

The Federal Chancellery is currently examining whether further immediate measures are indicated and necessary in the areas of prevention, instruction, science and legislation. It has also - together with the cantons - launched work on close monitoring. Further measures include advising the cantons, municipalities and committees as well as possible technical solutions. Fundamental changes to the current requirements for signature collections would require legal amendments, which would ultimately be the responsibility of parliament.

What is the criticism of the Federal Chancellery?

Following the report on the suspected forgeries, the Federal Chancellery is in the crossfire of criticism. The members of the responsible parliamentary committees only found out about the possible signature fraud through the media. The Federal Chancellery was aware of the irregularities, but neither it nor the Federal Council actively communicated about them, according to the criticism.

Why didn't the Federal Chancellery provide information earlier?

According to the Federal Chancellery, it was "not possible to inform the public about this problem" due to official secrecy and the ongoing criminal proceedings. The first concern is to ensure that any perpetrators are caught, it states. It is also important to avoid the Federal Chancellery influencing opinion on one initiative or another with its information. However, she welcomes the discussion that has now been initiated. However, Federal Chancellor Viktor Rossi admitted in an interview with SRF radio that the Federal Chancellery should have been more proactive in informing the public about the allegedly forged signatures.

How is Parliament reacting?

The role of the Federal Chancellery is the subject of the investigations initiated by the Control Committee of the Council of States (CPC-S). It wants to know whether and how the Federal Chancellery performed its duties. The National Council's Political Institutions Committee (SPK-N), in turn, has invited the large chamber's Control Committee to take a closer look at the case. It also discussed proposals for amendments to the law, but rejected them for the time being. The various criminal investigations should be awaited first.

Is there an electronic way out?

The Bern cantonal parliament sees digital signature collection as a possible opportunity in the fight against fraud. However, the canton should not rush ahead, parliament was told last week. The lead should be taken by the organization Digital Administration Switzerland, which is supported by the federal government and the canton. Advantages were mentioned in parliament: A digital signature is more difficult to forge than one affixed by hand, for example, it was said. State Secretary Christoph Auer conceded that digital signature collection might be less susceptible to fraud than physical collection. However, there are other dangers with e-collecting, such as foreign hackers.

What do the experts say?

Experts have differing opinions on the reports of suspected forgeries when collecting signatures. Martin Hilti, Managing Director of Transparency International Switzerland, said on Swiss radio SRF: "If there was systematic and large-scale fraud, as it appears to be, then this is a huge problem for our democracy." Trust in democracy is suffering. The authorities must be able to ensure that no more fraud can take place in future. According to political geographer Michael Hermann, it cannot be ruled out that initiatives were voted on that would not have actually come about. "But the voters had the final say." Hermann therefore judged the incident to be less serious than voting fraud.