Politics without secrets: Disclose political interest representations.
Politicians at the federal and cantonal levels must disclose all paid and unpaid interest ties, mandates, and contacts with lobby organizations. This information will be published in a publicly accessible, central register. Violations will be sanctioned. The goal is to strengthen transparency, trust, and democratic decision-making. Existing lists and transparency data are incomplete and voluntary.
Problem
- Unlike countries such as the USA or the EU, Switzerland does not have a mandatory, broad lobby register that systematically records and discloses all professional lobbyists and their activities.
- Studies show that many parliamentarians disclose their secondary incomes and conflicts of interest only incompletely. In some cases, 44% disclose no income at all, and only about 27% of the disclosures are complete.
- Party financing is non-transparent: Large donations can still flow anonymously and unchecked through foundations. This loophole undermines democratic control and obscures who actually finances political campaigns.
- All foundations and organizations that behave politically, socially, or lobby must disclose just as openly where their funds come from and which activities and organizations are supported. Fully disclose all interconnections of influence.
Solution
- There are ongoing initiatives and parliamentary proposals demanding more transparency in lobbying and the disclosure of conflicts of interest. Motions usually have no chance in parliament. Currently, there is an initiative with a signature collection.
- A binding lobby register records all professional interest representatives. The disclosure includes names, organizations, clients, budgets, and topics handled. This creates an official and transparent basis for political influence.
- In addition to the disclosure of actors, a legislative footprint is introduced. This transparently documents all contacts between lobbyists and the executive as well as the legislature during the drafting of bills.
- Donations and gifts to public officials must be declared or refused from a set threshold (for example CHF 150). This also includes disclosure of sponsored trips and invitations.
- The introduction of independent monitoring and effective sanctions transforms transparency from a moral expectation into a legally enforceable obligation. An autonomous control body checks compliance and consistently sanctions violations.
Benefit
- Transparency fosters trust by making influence channels and decision-making bases visible. This traceability strengthens democratic legitimacy and consolidates the population's trust in state institutions.
- Transparency increases the quality of legislation. The disclosure of influence leads to a more critical examination of proposals. This makes the unfiltered adoption of lobby positions more difficult and promotes independent, fact-based lawmaking.
- Transparency creates fair competitive conditions. The disclosure of influence channels ensures that, alongside financially strong actors, NGOs, academia, and smaller associations receive equal access to political discourse.
- Disclosure enforces a clear separation between the public mandate and private or professional interests. It minimizes conflicts of interest and ensures the priority of the common good in political decision-making.
- Transparency protects the militia system from blanket suspicion. Disclosure enables politicians who work correctly to prove their integrity and strengthen trust in their independence.
Public support
Total votes: 102
Breakdown: FullyOnBoard: 77, SoundsGood: 20, NoChance: 2, Concerns: 1, NeedForDiscussion: 1, NothingAgainstIt: 1
Discussion
- Monik Huber (2026-08-12): , to shape elections better. Too much support for the pharmaceutical industry is the lobbying in Bern, which costs our healthcare system so much money, except that it must simply be that way.
- Monik Huber (2026-08-12): Certain companies would no longer support politicians if their names had to be disclosed. The contribution would need to be limited so that several companies could be involved in the support. This would be democratic and would not fuel bias. Mandates for companies would also need to be limited, because there are always people who do not know when enough is enough. If it really concerns politics, politicians would at least have to specify the economic sector that supports them politically. This would also provide a better basis for voters.
- jacopo rodighiero (2026-07-29): This should be a standard practice across all public organizations and political parties. We should be clear on what steers the decision making of these our government and make sure these decisions are not tied to any external economic influence.
- Thomas Mathis (2026-04-18): I wonder what the counterargument will be. How does one argue for secretly influencing a democracy with money?
- ↳ Felix E. (2026-04-18): I also see no disadvantages with this matter. However, I see a problem with the disclosure of all donations in the financing of political campaigns. All donations over 15,000 Swiss francs are published. To enforce this, the party/committee must always know the identity of each donor (even for one franc). However, I do not find it sensible in this case if this cannot be done anonymously. I should be able to support a political cause without my name becoming public – regardless of how much I donate. At least for private individuals, this should be the case again.