Switzerland Recording Laws: All-Party Consent, Penalties & 2025 Updates

Switzerland Recording Laws: All-Party Consent, Penalties and 2025 Updates

Switzerland enforces one of the world's strictest recording consent regimes. Under Articles 179bis and 179ter of the Swiss Criminal Code (Strafgesetzbuch, StGB), recording any private conversation without the agreement of every participant is a criminal offense carrying up to three years in prison. This article covers the full legal framework, the revised Federal Act on Data Protection (revFADP, in force September 1, 2023), the new Art. 197a on non-consensual intimate images (in force July 1, 2024), and Switzerland's current position on deepfakes.

Information last verified on 2026-05-15. This article has not yet been reviewed by a licensed Swiss lawyer. For advice on your specific situation, consult a lawyer licensed in Switzerland.

Jurisdiction scope: This article addresses Swiss federal recording law under the Strafgesetzbuch (StGB), the revised Federal Act on Data Protection (revFADP), and the Swiss Civil Code (ZGB). Switzerland is not a member of the European Union and does not implement the GDPR domestically, though Swiss companies operating in EU/EEA markets face GDPR obligations under its extraterritorial scope. For Canadian recording law, see our guide to Canadian recording laws. For US state rules, see our US recording law hub.

Quick Answer: Is Switzerland All-Party Consent?

Yes. Switzerland requires the consent of every participant before any private conversation may be recorded. Under Art. 179ter of the StGB, a person who is part of a conversation commits a criminal offense by recording it without the permission of the other participants. This is the rule that most surprises visitors and business travelers from one-party consent countries.

The all-party consent requirement covers all formats: phone calls, in-person meetings, video conferences, voice messages, and any other private exchange. The law draws no distinction between analog and digital methods. Two narrow statutory exceptions exist under Art. 179quinquies for emergency service calls and routine bulk business transactions, and nothing else.

The FDPIC, Switzerland's federal data protection authority, states the rule plainly: "consent must be as clear and transparent as possible about the recording of the conversation and the purpose of the recording. It is important that consent is obtained before recording so that a data subject has the chance to object." Source: FDPIC, "When the Recording of Conversations Is Allowed and When Not," edoeb.admin.ch (last updated May 10, 2023).

Art. 179bis StGB: Eavesdropping on and Recording Others' Conversations

Article 179bis targets outsiders: any person who uses a listening device to eavesdrop on a private conversation they are not part of, or who records such a conversation, commits a criminal offense. The provision has been in force since May 1, 1969, and its technology-neutral drafting covers smartphones, digital recorders, and any other device capable of capturing audio.

The statute reads, in official English translation:

"Any person who by using a listening device and without the permission of all those participating, listens in on a private conversation between other persons, or records such a conversation on a recording device" is liable.

The provision covers three distinct offenses:

1. Eavesdropping or recording. Using any device to listen in on or capture a non-public conversation that you are not part of, without all participants' permission.
2. Exploiting unlawfully obtained information. Making use of information that you know, or must assume, reached you as a result of an illegal eavesdropping or recording act.
3. Storing or distributing illegal recordings. Keeping a recording that you know or must assume was made unlawfully, or making it available to a third party.

Penalty Under Art. 179bis

The penalty is a custodial sentence of up to three years or a monetary penalty, prosecuted on complaint (Antragsdelikt). Prosecution requires a formal complaint from the affected party within three months of learning the offender's identity. This is the harshest penalty among the StGB's recording provisions.

Art. 179ter StGB: Unauthorized Recording of Your Own Conversations

Article 179ter is the provision that distinguishes Switzerland from most jurisdictions worldwide. It makes it a criminal offense for a participant in a private conversation to record that conversation without the consent of the other participants. The statute reads:

"Any person who, as a participant in a private conversation, records the conversation on a recording device without the permission of the other participants" is liable.

In practical terms: pressing record on your phone during a call with a business colleague, without first telling them, is a crime under Swiss law. The same applies to in-person meetings, video conferences, and any other private exchange. Ignorance of Swiss law is not a defense.

The provision also criminalizes downstream handling of unlawful participant recordings:

1. Recording without consent. Making a recording of a private conversation you are part of, on any device, without all other participants' permission.
2. Handling unlawful recordings. Storing, using, making available, or disclosing the contents of a recording that you know or must assume was made in violation of paragraph 1.

Penalty Under Art. 179ter

The penalty is a custodial sentence of up to one year or a monetary penalty, on complaint. The lower maximum compared to Art. 179bis reflects Swiss law's distinction between a participant who records and an outsider who eavesdrops, treating third-party eavesdropping as the more serious offense.

Why This Matters for Travelers and Foreign Businesses

People from one-party consent countries routinely assume they may record their own calls. In the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, and most EU member states, a participant generally has that right. Switzerland is an explicit exception. Anyone conducting business meetings in Switzerland, or holding calls with Swiss counterparts while physically in Switzerland, should understand this before activating any recording feature.

Art. 179quater StGB: Image Privacy

Article 179quater separately protects the private domain from unauthorized visual recording. It prohibits observing a person with optical devices or photographing and filming facts belonging to that person's private domain. The penalty mirrors Art. 179bis: up to three years in prison or a monetary penalty, on complaint.

Video recordings that also capture audio simultaneously trigger both Art. 179quater and the audio recording provisions of Arts. 179bis or 179ter. A person who covertly films a private meeting therefore faces potential liability under two separate criminal provisions at once.

Art. 179quinquies StGB: The Narrow Exceptions

Article 179quinquies provides the only statutory exceptions to the all-party consent requirement. These exceptions are limited to telephone conversations and cover two specific situations.

Exception 1: Emergency, Rescue, and Security Services

Calls to emergency services, rescue services, and security services may be recorded by those services without individual consent from callers. This exception covers calls to police, fire departments, ambulance dispatch, and similar crisis lines. The services may retain and use these recordings for their operational and investigative purposes.

Exception 2: Routine Bulk Business Transactions

Telephone conversations involving orders, contracts, reservations, and similar business transactions conducted in high volume with time pressure may be recorded. The FDPIC emphasizes that this exception is narrow. Conversations that qualify include telephone ordering services, hotel and restaurant reservation lines, and financial trading desks recording transaction instructions.

Conversations that do not qualify:

• Customer complaints or service queries
• Complex contract negotiations
• Advisory, consulting, or coaching calls
• Sales calls that go beyond routine order-taking
• Employee performance or disciplinary discussions

Purpose Limitation

Even when the bulk business exception applies, recordings may only be used to preserve evidence of the transaction itself. Using them for marketing analysis, employee training, quality monitoring, or disclosure to third parties is not covered and may violate both the StGB and the revFADP.

The Art. 179quinquies exceptions do not apply to in-person conversations. They are drafted for telephone communications only.

Civil Remedies: Civil Code Art. 28 and Art. 28a

Beyond criminal liability, Swiss civil law provides independent remedies for unauthorized recording and use of a person's image or voice. Swiss Civil Code (Zivilgesetzbuch, ZGB) Art. 28 protects personality rights from unlawful intrusion.

Photographs, audio recordings, and video recordings of identifiable persons constitute personal data under the revFADP and simultaneously engage personality rights under Art. 28 ZGB. A person's right to their own image is a core component of this protection: every individual has the right to determine how and where their likeness is published or distributed.

An infringement of Art. 28 requires that the affected person is both subjectively recognizable (they can identify themselves) and objectively recognizable (others can identify them from the material).

Three Justifications That Defeat an Art. 28 Claim

Art. 28 para. 2 ZGB recognizes three situations where a personality rights infringement does not exist:

1. Consent. The person depicted or recorded explicitly or tacitly consented to the use of their image or voice in the specific context.
2. Overriding interest. There is a demonstrable overriding private or public interest, such as journalism reporting on a matter of genuine public concern.
3. Legal justification. A specific legal provision permits the use, such as official law enforcement activity under a court order.

Civil Remedies Under Art. 28a ZGB

A person whose personality rights are infringed may seek: a court injunction preventing or stopping the infringement; a declaration that the infringement is unlawful; an order requiring the removal of the infringing material; monetary damages; and satisfaction (Genugtuung) for non-material harm. These civil claims exist independently of any criminal complaint and may be pursued in parallel with criminal proceedings.

The revFADP: Switzerland's Revised Data Protection Law

The revised Federal Act on Data Protection (revFADP, or revDSG in German) entered into force on September 1, 2023, replacing Switzerland's 1992 data protection statute. It governs the processing of personal data, including voice recordings, video recordings, and any data derived from them.

Switzerland is not a member of the EU and did not adopt the GDPR. The revFADP is Switzerland's own law, designed to be broadly equivalent to the GDPR to maintain Switzerland's adequacy status with the European Commission. Key differences from the GDPR include the individual-liability model for criminal sanctions and the absence of administrative fines imposed by the regulator.

Key revFADP Requirements for Recordings

Consent. When consent is the legal basis for processing, it must be freely given, informed, and specific. Recordings containing sensitive personal data, including health information, religious views, or biometric voice patterns, require express consent.

Transparency. Individuals whose voice or image is recorded must be informed of the purpose of the recording, how it will be used, who will access it, and how long it will be retained. This obligation exists independently of the StGB consent requirement.

Data minimization. Recordings should capture only what is necessary for the stated purpose. Blanket recording of all calls or meetings without a justified basis violates the proportionality principle.

Data subject rights. Individuals have the right to request access to recordings of their voice, demand correction of inaccurate information derived from recordings, and require deletion when no legal basis for continued storage exists.

revFADP Penalties

Criminal fines under the revFADP reach up to CHF 250,000 (approximately USD 280,000 / EUR 260,000 as of May 2026). This is a 25-fold increase from the CHF 10,000 maximum under the old law.

A critical distinction from the EU's GDPR: Swiss data protection fines target individuals, not companies. The compliance officer, department head, or executive who authorizes unlawful recording practices can be personally prosecuted. A limited exception applies when a fine would not exceed CHF 50,000 and identifying the responsible individual would require disproportionate investigative effort; in that case, the fine may be imposed on the company instead.

Prosecution under the revFADP requires willful (intentional) conduct. Negligent violations do not trigger criminal sanctions, though they may still give rise to civil liability.

The FDPIC: Switzerland's Data Protection Authority

The Federal Data Protection and Information Commissioner (FDPIC, or EDOB in German) is Switzerland's independent supervisory authority for data protection. The FDPIC oversees compliance with the revFADP, publishes guidance on recording scenarios including workplace telephone monitoring and video surveillance, and can issue binding orders requiring organizations to change their practices.

The FDPIC does not directly impose criminal fines. Criminal prosecutions under the revFADP are handled by cantonal law enforcement authorities. The FDPIC's guidance documents on edoeb.admin.ch reflect the authority's enforcement priorities and interpretive positions, even though they are not legally binding in the way statutes are. In October 2025, the FDPIC released updated cookie guidelines, reflecting the authority's continuing activity under the revFADP.

Phone Calls

Recording a telephone call without the consent of every person on the line violates Art. 179ter (if you are a participant) or Art. 179bis (if you are an outsider intercepting the call). The Art. 179quinquies exceptions for emergency services and bulk business transactions apply only to telephone conversations.

For cross-border calls, Swiss law applies to any recording initiated from Swiss territory. If you are physically in Switzerland and record a call with a person in another country, Swiss law governs your act of recording regardless of where the other party is located. Conversely, a person outside Switzerland who records a call with a Swiss participant may be exposed to civil liability under ZGB Art. 28 if the recording is later used in a way that harms the Swiss party.

In-Person Conversations

Recording a face-to-face conversation at a meeting, at a restaurant, or in any other setting follows the same all-party consent rule. Hidden microphones, concealed smartphones set to record, body-worn audio recorders, and smart devices placed in a room all fall within the scope of Arts. 179bis and 179ter. The Art. 179quinquies exceptions do not apply to in-person conversations.

Recording Police in Switzerland

Switzerland has no statutory provision banning citizens from filming or photographing police officers in public spaces. Cantonal police commanders have stated publicly that a general ban "is not feasible and not conceivable in a liberal constitutional state" and that police accountability to the public requires tolerating a degree of observation. The Swiss Conference of Police Directors reinforced this position in 2024, noting that police body cameras are a preferred solution for ensuring accurate documentation.

The legal analysis differs for audio versus video:

Audio recording of police. Recording the audio of a conversation with a police officer falls squarely under Art. 179ter: you are a participant in a private conversation, and recording without the officer's consent is a criminal offense. Whether a conversation with police on the street constitutes a "private" or "non-public" conversation may turn on circumstances, but the FDPIC's guidance and Federal Supreme Court precedent interpret "non-public" broadly.

Video recording without audio. Filming police without capturing audio engages Art. 179quater's private-domain test. Police conducting official duties in a genuinely public space would generally not be considered to have a private-domain interest in those activities. This is consistent with the cantonal commanders' position that filming police at work is permissible in principle.

Posting recordings online. Publishing a recording of police online may separately engage ZGB Art. 28 (right to image), the revFADP (personal data processing), and cantonal rules on disturbing official operations. Legal review is advisable before distributing any recording of a police encounter.

Workplace Recording Rules

Switzerland places significant restrictions on recording and monitoring employees.

Employer Monitoring of Phone Calls

The Swiss Code of Obligations (Obligationenrecht, OR) Art. 328 requires employers to protect employees' personal interests. Art. 26 of Ordinance 3 to the Employment Act (ArGV 3, Verordnung 3 zum Arbeitsgesetz) explicitly prohibits the use of monitoring or control systems that exclusively or primarily surveil employee behavior.

Employers may not listen to or record employees' private phone calls under any circumstances. For business calls, employers may implement recording, but only with the consent of all participants and after providing clear written notice to employees. The FDPIC requires employers to:

• Inform employees in writing about the monitoring system in use
• Explain how the system operates
• Clearly distinguish between private and business calls
• State what employment consequences may follow from violations
• Specify data retention periods (technical metadata such as call numbers, times, and durations: maximum 6 months)

CCTV recordings in the workplace must generally be deleted within 72 hours unless a specific incident has occurred requiring retention for investigation.

Employee-Initiated Recording

An employee who secretly records a conversation with a supervisor, colleague, or client commits a criminal offense under Art. 179ter. This applies even when the employee believes they need evidence of harassment, discrimination, or other wrongdoing. Swiss courts have consistently held that the need for evidence does not justify unauthorized recording; the proper avenue is to report suspected conduct to cantonal authorities or labor inspection bodies.

The admissibility exception from BGE 133 IV 249 applies in criminal proceedings involving serious crimes with a maximum sentence of at least three years. It does not extend to employment disputes or civil litigation.

Video Surveillance in the Workplace

CCTV and video monitoring must comply with both the revFADP and Art. 26 of ArGV 3. Cameras may not be installed for the purpose of monitoring employee performance. When surveillance is justified for security purposes, employees must receive advance notice, the monitored area must be minimized, and recordings must be deleted within 72 hours absent a specific incident.

Recording in Public Spaces

The StGB provisions protect private (non-public) conversations. A conversation is non-public when participants conduct it with a reasonable expectation that it cannot be overheard by the general public without technical assistance. The Federal Supreme Court (Bundesgericht) has interpreted this standard broadly: the test is whether participants had a reasonable expectation of privacy, not whether they were in a nominally public space.

A conversation between two people at a quiet corner table in a restaurant may still qualify as non-public even though the restaurant is a public venue. A whispered exchange in a busy public square might also carry a reasonable privacy expectation depending on context.

Private individuals and businesses are generally not permitted to operate CCTV systems that monitor public property. The FDPIC's position is that preserving order in public areas is a police function. A security camera covering an ATM may incidentally capture a small portion of public sidewalk within the narrow exception, but storage of such footage is typically limited to 24 to 72 hours absent a specific incident.

Cantonal Considerations

Swiss criminal law, including the StGB recording provisions, is federal law that applies uniformly across all 26 cantons. There are no cantonal variations in the definition of the offenses or in the maximum penalties.

However, prosecution is handled by cantonal authorities. Each canton has its own Staatsanwaltschaft (prosecution office) and courts. Filing a criminal complaint (Strafanzeige) follows cantonal procedural rules under the federal Swiss Criminal Procedure Code (StPO). Some cantons maintain supplementary police regulations addressing surveillance at public events or recording by private security firms; these add administrative requirements but do not override the federal StGB rules.

Voyeurism and Non-Consensual Intimate Images

Art. 197a StGB: Non-Consensual Distribution of Intimate Content

Effective July 1, 2024, the new Swiss sexual criminal law introduced Art. 197a StGB, which criminalizes the non-consensual distribution of sexual content to third parties without the depicted person's consent. This provision directly addresses "revenge porn" and non-consensual intimate image (NCII) sharing. The offense is prosecutable on complaint.

Art. 197a does not require that the underlying recording was made without consent. A recording that was originally made consensually in a private context becomes criminal if subsequently distributed to third parties without consent.

Art. 179quater and Voyeurism

Art. 179quater, which predates Art. 197a, separately criminalizes the unauthorized observation or filming of facts belonging to a person's private domain. This provision targets the act of creating a voyeuristic recording. Art. 197a targets the act of distributing intimate content without consent. The two provisions can apply cumulatively: a person who covertly records and then distributes intimate imagery may face liability under both articles.

Deepfakes and AI-Generated Content

Switzerland has no specific legislation targeting deepfakes. On May 7, 2025, the Swiss House of Representatives rejected a motion by Green Party MP Raphaël Mahaim proposing mandatory labeling requirements for AI-generated content and stricter prohibitions on certain deepfake practices. The vote was 111 against to 70 in favor.

The Swiss government's position, articulated by Communications Minister Albert Rösti, is that existing criminal and civil laws already cover the harms associated with deepfakes. Under this framework:

• A deepfake recording of a person's voice or likeness without their consent may violate ZGB Art. 28 (personality rights and image rights).
• A deepfake used to make a private communication appear to have occurred may engage StGB Art. 179bis or 179ter if the fabricated content is treated as an actual recording.
• Non-consensual sexualized deepfakes may fall within Art. 197a StGB (in force July 1, 2024) if they constitute sexual content distributed without consent.
• Criminal defamation and fraud provisions may apply in context-specific cases.

EU AI Act: Limited Direct Applicability

Switzerland is not implementing the EU AI Act domestically and will not adopt a "Swiss AI Act." However, the EU AI Act applies extraterritorially to any organization offering AI systems within the EU. Swiss companies that develop, deploy, or import AI systems for use by EU market participants must comply with the EU AI Act under its Art. 2 scope, including its provisions on AI-generated deepfake content. A consultation draft for implementing the Council of Europe AI Convention is expected by end of 2026, with any resulting Swiss legislation unlikely to take effect before 2029.

Cross-Border Considerations: EU and US

EU and GDPR

Switzerland is not in the EU. The revFADP is Switzerland's own law, not the GDPR. However, GDPR Art. 3 applies extraterritorially to Swiss companies that offer goods or services to persons in the EU/EEA or monitor EU/EEA residents' behavior. A Swiss company running a call center that records calls with EU customers must comply with both the revFADP and the GDPR if it targets EU consumers.

The European Commission has recognized Switzerland as providing an adequate level of data protection under EU data protection law, meaning personal data may flow from the EU to Switzerland without additional transfer mechanisms.

Swiss-US Data Privacy Framework

On August 14, 2024, the Swiss Federal Council determined that the Swiss-US Data Privacy Framework provides adequate protection for personal data transferred from Switzerland to certified US organizations. The Framework entered into force on September 15, 2024, replacing the previous Swiss-US Privacy Shield. Organizations transferring recordings or recording-derived data from Switzerland to the US should verify whether their US counterpart is certified under the Framework or relies on an alternative transfer mechanism such as Standard Contractual Clauses.

Recording Law Jurisdiction in Cross-Border Calls

When a recording is initiated from Swiss territory, Swiss criminal law applies regardless of where other participants are located. A participant in Switzerland who records a call without consent of a US counterpart violates Art. 179ter even if recording would be lawful under US federal law or the US counterpart's state law.

Conversely, a non-Swiss participant who records a call from abroad may not face Swiss criminal liability for the act of recording, but may face civil liability under ZGB Art. 28 if the recording is later used in a way that harms the Swiss participant.

Penalties Summary

All StGB recording offenses require a formal complaint from the affected party (Antragsdelikt). The complaint window is generally three months from the date the complainant learned the identity of the offender.

Business Compliance: What Companies Need to Know

Organizations operating in or dealing with Switzerland should build compliance programs around the intersection of the StGB, the revFADP, and ZGB Art. 28.

Call Recording Compliance

Step 1: Determine whether an exception applies. Only genuine bulk business transactions under Art. 179quinquies qualify. Customer service, consulting, and advisory calls do not.

Step 2: Obtain all-party consent. Play a clear disclosure at the start of every call not within the 179quinquies exception. Obtain affirmative consent before recording begins. Consent must identify the purpose, who will access the recording, and how long it will be retained.

Step 3: Provide an opt-out. If a participant declines, the call proceeds without recording. Refusing service because a customer will not consent raises significant legal risk.

Step 4: Limit use and retention. Use recordings only for the stated purpose. Enforce defined retention periods. The revFADP data minimization principle prohibits indefinite storage.

Step 5: Document everything. Maintain records of consent mechanisms, retention policies, access controls, and data subject requests.

Meeting and Video Conference Recording

A company that records internal meetings must obtain all participants' consent. For video conferences using Zoom, Teams, Webex, or similar platforms, the built-in recording notification is a starting point, but Swiss law requires actual consent, not just notice. Participants must have the opportunity to object before recording begins.

Recent Developments (2023 to 2026)

September 1, 2023: revFADP enters into force. The revised data protection law increased maximum individual fines from CHF 10,000 to CHF 250,000 and shifted liability to individuals rather than companies.

September 15, 2024: Swiss-US Data Privacy Framework. The Federal Council certified the Framework as providing adequate protection for data transfers from Switzerland to certified US organizations.

July 1, 2024: Art. 197a StGB. New provision criminalizing non-consensual distribution of intimate imagery entered into force as part of the reformed Swiss sexual criminal law.

May 7, 2025: Deepfake regulation motion rejected. The Swiss House of Representatives voted 111 to 70 against a motion to introduce mandatory deepfake labeling and targeted prohibitions. The government maintains that existing law is sufficient.

October 2025: FDPIC updates cookie guidelines. The FDPIC issued updated guidance on cookie consent under the revFADP, reflecting the authority's continued post-revFADP enforcement activity.

Ongoing: VUPF surveillance ordinance debate. Proposed changes to the Ordinance on the Surveillance of Post and Telecommunications (VUPF) have drawn opposition from technology companies and privacy advocates. The government has indicated revisions will address public feedback, but no amendments had entered into force as of May 2026.

Disclaimer

This article provides general legal information about Swiss recording law. It is not legal advice and does not create a lawyer-client relationship. The information covers federal Swiss law under the Strafgesetzbuch (StGB), the revised Federal Act on Data Protection (revFADP), and the Swiss Civil Code (ZGB), verified as of May 15, 2026. Statutes may be amended after publication. Laws vary by jurisdiction; cantonal procedure may differ. For advice on your specific situation, consult a lawyer licensed in Switzerland.

Authorities Cited

1. Swiss Criminal Code (StGB), Art. 179bis (Listening in on and recording the conversations of others). https://www.fedlex.admin.ch/eli/cc/54/757_781_799/en
2. Swiss Criminal Code (StGB), Art. 179ter (Unauthorised recording of conversations). https://www.droit-bilingue.ch/en-de/3/31/311.0-179ter-221.html
3. Swiss Criminal Code (StGB), Art. 179quater (Violation of the secret or private sphere). https://www.fedlex.admin.ch/eli/cc/54/757_781_799/en
4. Swiss Criminal Code (StGB), Art. 179quinquies (Permitted recording). https://www.fedlex.admin.ch/eli/cc/54/757_781_799/en
5. Swiss Criminal Code (StGB), Art. 197a (Non-consensual distribution of intimate content, in force July 1, 2024). https://legal12tablesavocats.ch/en/2025/02/22/new-provisions-in-swiss-criminal-law-on-offences-against-sexual-liberty-and-integrity/
6. Swiss Civil Code (ZGB), Art. 28 and Art. 28a (Protection of personality rights). https://www.fedlex.admin.ch/eli/cc/24/233_245_233/en
7. Revised Federal Act on Data Protection (revFADP / revDSG), in force September 1, 2023. https://www.kmu.admin.ch/kmu/en/home/facts-and-trends/digitization/data-protection/new-federal-act-on-data-protection-nfadp.html
8. Federal Constitution of the Swiss Confederation, Art. 13 (Right to Privacy). https://www.fedlex.admin.ch/eli/cc/1999/404/en
9. Swiss Code of Obligations (OR), Art. 328 (Employer duty to protect employee personality rights). https://www.fedlex.admin.ch/eli/cc/27/317_321_377/en
10. Ordinance 3 to the Employment Act (ArGV 3), Art. 26 (Prohibition on employee monitoring systems). https://www.fedlex.admin.ch/eli/cc/1994/1281_1281_1281/en
11. BGE 133 IV 249 (Bundesgericht: admissibility of privately obtained recordings in criminal proceedings). https://www.servat.unibe.ch/dfr/bge/c4133249.html
12. FDPIC: When the Recording of Conversations Is Allowed and When Not. https://www.edoeb.admin.ch/en/recording-conversations
13. FDPIC: Telephone Monitoring in the Workplace. https://www.edoeb.admin.ch/en/telephone-monitoring-in-the-workplace
14. FDPIC: Telecommunications Confidentiality and Surveillance of Telecommunications. https://www.edoeb.admin.ch/en/telecommunications-confidentiality-and-surveillance-of-telecommunications
15. FDPIC: Video Surveillance of Public Places by Private Individuals. https://www.edoeb.admin.ch/en/video-surveillance-of-public-places-by-private-individuals
16. FDPIC: Monitoring Systems in the Workplace. https://www.edoeb.admin.ch/en/monitoring-systems-in-the-workplace
17. Swiss Federal Council: New Federal Act on Data Protection (nFADP). https://www.kmu.admin.ch/kmu/en/home/facts-and-trends/digitization/data-protection/new-federal-act-on-data-protection-nfadp.html
18. Legal XII Avocats: New Provisions in Swiss Criminal Law on Sexual Offenses (Art. 197a, July 1, 2024). https://legal12tablesavocats.ch/en/2025/02/22/new-provisions-in-swiss-criminal-law-on-offences-against-sexual-liberty-and-integrity/
19. SWI swissinfo.ch: Switzerland Rejects Deepfake Regulation (May 7, 2025 vote). https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/ai-governance/switzerland-rejects-deepfake-regulation/89277391
20. SWI swissinfo.ch: Cantons Oppose Moves to Ban Citizen Filming of Police Arrests. https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/politics/cantons-oppose-moves-to-ban-citizen-filming-of-police-arrests/48696164
21. CCdigitallaw.ch: Right of Personality and Data Protection in the Event of Photos (ZGB Art. 28). https://www.ccdigitallaw.ch/right-of-personality-and-data-protection-in-the-event-of-photos/