瑞士的国内法律框架
法律入门：关键概念和定义 ● 国家：职能、结构和政治制度 ● 法律的不同部门 ● 法律渊源 ● 法律的主要形成传统 ● 法律关系的要素 ● 法律的适用 ● 法律的实施 ● 瑞士从起源到20世纪的发展 ● 瑞士的国内法律框架 ● 瑞士的国家结构、政治制度和中立 ● 19世纪末至20世纪中叶国际关系的演变 ● 世界组织 ● 欧洲组织及其与瑞士的关系 ● 基本权利的类别和世代 ● 基本权利的起源 ● 十八世纪末的权利宣言 ● 二十世纪基本权利普遍概念的构建
法律规范等级原则
在瑞士这样的法律体系中，规范等级的概念是确保法律秩序一致性和合法性的基本原则。国际法处于这一等级的顶端，其中包括国际条约和协定，如瑞士于1974年批准的《欧洲人权公约》。这些条约一经批准，即成为国内法的一部分，并优先于国内法。
根据国际法，1999年大幅修订的《瑞士联邦宪法》发挥着核心作用。它不仅规定了国家的基本原则和公民权利，还规定了政治和行政结构。作为最高标准，它指导着适用于全国的联邦法律的起草工作。例如，1995 年通过的《联邦男女平等法》说明了联邦法律如何具体落实宪法原则。为了执行这些法律，政府或行政当局颁布了法令。这些法令虽然不如法律那么正式，但对于具体规定实际和技术细节却至关重要。例如，《医疗保险条例》详细规定了 1994 年《医疗保险法》的实际内容。
在瑞士联邦制度下，各州享有高度自治权，州宪法规定了各州机构的组织和运作。这些宪法必须符合联邦宪法。例如，2003 年通过的沃州宪法就体现了这种等级关系。州法律由州议会通过，涉及各州职权范围内的事务，如教育或警察。这些法律必须符合州宪法和联邦宪法。1959 年，沃州先于联邦在州一级引入了妇女选举权，这表明州法律有时可以先于联邦法律的变化。最后，与联邦法令类似的州法令对州法律的实施至关重要。它们可以根据当地的具体情况进行调整。
这种分级制度确保瑞士法律与其宪法和国际原则保持一致。它还表明瑞士法律在面对社会和国际变化时的灵活性和适应性，同时尊重各州的多样性和自治性。
国际法规则，尤其是源自欧洲共同体的国际法规则的出现和日益融合，已开始打破瑞士等国传统的规范等级制度。虽然瑞士不是欧盟成员国，但与欧盟保持着密切的关系，这导致瑞士的法律体系采用了许多欧洲规则和标准。瑞士与欧盟之间的人员自由流动协议就是这种影响的一个典型例子，该协议于2002年生效。该协议要求瑞士调整立法，特别是在劳动法和移民政策方面，以符合欧洲标准。欧洲标准越来越多地融入瑞士法律，引发了有关国家主权以及这些标准如何融入现有规范等级的复杂问题。传统上，瑞士联邦宪法和联邦法律具有优先地位，但采用欧洲标准有时会与国内法产生矛盾或冲突。
此外，瑞士立法与国际协定的一致性问题也经常提交给瑞士联邦最高法院。这些情况有时会引发公众和政治辩论，讨论瑞士应如何平衡其法律自治与国际和欧洲协议的要求。这种现象并非瑞士独有，许多其他非欧盟成员国但参加了某些欧洲协议的国家也面临着类似的挑战。这一发展反映出国际法和欧洲法的相互关联性日益增强，对国家法律体系产生了影响，并对传统的规范等级制度提出了挑战。瑞士将国际条约纳入国内法律秩序，使其优先于国内法律。这种纳入意味着，国际条约一旦获得瑞士批准，其条款就直接适用于瑞士的法律体系，而无需将其转化为具体的国内立法。
国际准则的这种优先地位是国际公法的一项基本原则，被称为 "一元论"，即国际规则和国内规则构成一个统一的法律体系。在瑞士，这一原则体现在法律和宪法实践中。瑞士联邦宪法》明确承认国际法的优先地位，规定已批准的国际条约优先于与之冲突的联邦法律。但这一优先地位并不意味着国际准则优先于《瑞士联邦宪法》。如果国际标准与宪法发生冲突，问题就会变得复杂，可能需要立法干预，甚至需要修改宪法。例如，为遵守国际协议（如瑞士与欧盟之间的双边协议）而需要进行的调整，有时需要修改立法或进行民众投票，以解决与瑞士法律或宪法的潜在冲突。这一法律框架强调了瑞士对国际法的承诺以及遵守国际标准和义务的意愿。它也反映了在全球化和各国日益相互依存的背景下，尊重国际承诺和维护国家主权之间平衡的复杂性。
瑞士联邦宪法》第 5 条规定了依法治国的原则，在瑞士的法律和政治架构中发挥着至关重要的作用。这一宪法条款强调了瑞士对法治和民主治理的高度尊重。该条第一款强调，法律既是国家活动的基础，也是国家活动的界限。这反映了瑞士的法制传统，可追溯到 1848 年现代联邦国家的建立，在这一传统中，尊重法律被视为政府行为合法性的根本。这种做法确保国家采取的所有行动都有法律依据，并在法律范围内，从而防止任意和专制。第二段介绍了公共利益和相称性的概念。从历史上看，这一原则对于平衡社会需求与个人权利至关重要。例如，在执行 1983 年《联邦环境保护法》等环境政策时，国家必须确保所采取的措施不仅符合公共利益，而且与所追求的目标相称，从而避免过度限制。第三款坚持要求国家和个人在活动中保持善意，这是政府和公民之间信任的支柱。这一诚信要求是解释法律和处理公共事务的指导原则。它加强了透明度和公正性，而这些价值观正是瑞士政治文化的核心。最后，第四段申明联邦和各州必须尊重国际法，这在当代全球化背景下尤为重要。瑞士通过遵守《日内瓦公约》等国际条约，在历史上表明了其对国际法的承诺。这一宪法条款确保瑞士在保持其法律和政治完整性的同时，继续忠实于其国际承诺。因此，《瑞士联邦宪法》第 5 条体现了自 19 世纪以来指导瑞士国家发展的基本原则。它反映了瑞士对合法性、相称性、善意和尊重国际法等原则的承诺，这些原则对于维护民主社会的法律秩序和政治稳定至关重要。
瑞士法律体系中的国际条约优先原则源于拉丁格言 "Pacta sunt servanda"，意为 "协议必须得到尊重"。该原则是国际公法的基石，规定各国有义务遵守和适用其批准的条约。瑞士在通过一项国际条约时，承诺将该条约的规定纳入国内法律体系并予以遵守。这意味着国际法对瑞士法律具有直接影响，在发生冲突时，国际条约优先于国内法律。这种做法符合瑞士对国际法的承诺，也反映了瑞士以负责任的方式参与国际社会的愿望。
从历史上看，瑞士一直重视国际法，瑞士在主办国际组织和促进国际和平与合作方面发挥的作用就证明了这一点。例如，日内瓦国际组织是许多国际组织的总部，也是外交和条约谈判的重要地点。瑞士还在起草日内瓦四公约方面发挥了重要作用，这些公约是国际人道主义法的基础。尊重 "条约必须遵守 "原则和国际法在瑞士法律中的优先地位不仅是法律义务，也是瑞士中立和尊重国际协议传统的体现。这种做法使瑞士得以保持其作为一个尊重法律的可靠国家的国际声誉，并在国际社会中发挥积极和建设性的作用。
现代国际法的奠基人之一雨果-格劳秀斯（Hugo Grotius）所确立的 "条约必须遵守 "的格言所体现的诚信原则实际上是国际法的一个基本支柱。在其于 1625 年出版的开创性著作《战争与和平法》（De Jure Belli ac Pacis）中，格劳秀斯为现在公认的万国法（或国际公法）奠定了基础。根据格劳秀斯的观点，善意在国家间关系中至关重要。这意味着各国必须遵守自己的承诺，尤其是它们批准的国际条约和协定。这一理念的基础是，国家根据这些条约做出的承诺必须兑现，这是国际关系稳定性和可预测性的保证。尊重履行条约的诚意对于维护国际和平与秩序至关重要。这意味着国家一旦做出国际承诺，就不能置之不理，必须言行一致。包括瑞士在内的许多国家的法律实践都体现了这一方针，在瑞士，遵守国际条约是国家法律体系的组成部分。就瑞士而言，尊重诚信和国际法的首要地位也符合瑞士的中立传统及其作为国际冲突调解人的角色。通过严格遵守其国际承诺，瑞士加强了其在国际舞台上的信誉和声望，这对于一个作为众多国际组织的东道国并经常作为外交谈判的中立国来说是至关重要的。
在瑞士，联邦法律优先于州法律是该国联邦制法律体系中的一项基本原则，具体表现为 "Bundesrecht bricht kantonales Recht"（直译为 "联邦法律优先于州法律"）。该原则也被称为 "联邦法律的贬损力"，规定当联邦法律与州法律发生冲突时，以联邦法律为准。这一规则反映了瑞士的联邦制结构，即联邦（联邦政府）和各州共享权力。虽然各州享有广泛的自治权，可以在许多领域进行立法，但其法律必须符合联邦宪法和联邦法律。联邦法律至上的原则确保了全国法律框架的统一性和一致性，同时也允许地方享有一定程度的多样性和自治权。从历史上看，这一原则的确立是为了在各州的自治与某些涉及国家利益的领域的统一立法需求之间保持平衡。例如，在公民权利、外交政策或国防等领域，必须以联邦法律为准，以确保在国家层面采取一致和统一的方法。联邦法律的优先地位也是解决州立法与联邦立法之间潜在矛盾的关键因素。例如，如果某州通过的法律与联邦法律相冲突，联邦最高法院作为瑞士的最高法院，可能会被要求适用 "Bundesrecht bricht kantonales Recht "原则来解决冲突。
瑞士联邦宪法》第49条规定联邦法律优先于各州法律，在维护瑞士法律秩序和国家统一方面发挥着核心作用。该条款反映了瑞士的联邦制结构，即在各州自治和联邦国家完整之间寻求平衡。从历史上看，自 1848 年建立现代国家以来，瑞士一直是一个联邦制国家，各州拥有自己的政府和立法机构。但是，在涉及国家利益的问题上，联邦法律必须具有优先权。这一点在不同的历史背景下都有所体现，例如运输或贸易政策的协调，在这些情况下，需要在国家层面采取协调一致的方法，这对国家的经济发展和一体化至关重要。第 49 条规定，尽管各州有权在教育或公共卫生等不同领域进行立法，但其法律不得与联邦法律相抵触。例如，在能源政策方面，各州可以制定自己的法规，但这些法规必须符合联邦标准，如《能源法》中规定的标准。本文还强调了联邦在确保各州遵守联邦法律方面的作用。这涉及到一个监督机制，以确保各州的行动不违背联邦法律。联邦最高法院作为国家的最高司法机构，经常被要求对联邦法律和州法律之间的争议做出裁决，从而确认了联邦法律的优先地位。该条款的重要性在于，它既能维护瑞士立法的统一性和法律的一致性，又能尊重各州的多样性和自治性。这使瑞士能够保持其作为联邦国家的稳定性和完整性，同时适应当代的发展和挑战。简而言之，第 49 条是瑞士如何协调其联邦治理承诺与国家统一的有力例证。
宪法
被视为基本准则的1999年《瑞士联邦宪法》在瑞士的法律和社会框架中发挥着至关重要的作用。正如 19 世纪颇具影响力的法学家和社会学家洛伦茨-冯-斯坦因（Lorenz von Stein）所强调的那样，这部宪法在形式上不仅仅是法律的集合，它还是社会秩序和国家公民社会存在的体现。冯-斯坦因在其宪法概念中强调，宪法是一个社会的社会和政治结构的反映。他认为，宪法不仅规范国家的法律方面，还包含社会的价值观、原则和愿望。1999 年《瑞士宪法》取代了 1874 年的旧版宪法，清楚地表明了这一观点。
1999 年的宪法修订不仅仅是对现有法律的更新，而是对宪法的全面修订，目的是使宪法现代化，让公民更容易理解和使用。它纳入了直接民主、联邦制和尊重人权等原则，反映了瑞士社会的基本价值观。瑞士宪法作为一项基本准则，是瑞士所有其他法律的框架。它保障个人自由，确立法治原则，并规定联邦政府和各州之间的权力划分。这种宪法结构使瑞士能够在国家统一和地区多样性之间保持平衡，这也是瑞士民族特性的一个重要方面。
正式意义上的宪法
在法律方面，正如 1999 年《瑞士联邦宪法》所示，正式意义上的宪法概念至关重要。正式意义上的宪法以其书面形式、通过时的庄严性及其在法律规范等级中的最高权威地位而与众不同。成文宪法是法律和政治稳定的支柱，为国家治理提供了清晰易懂的框架。这与那些宪法不是单一的成文法文件的制度形成鲜明对比，如英国，其宪法是法律、公约和判例法的集合。
正式意义上的宪法通过过程通常以庄严和严格为特点。例如，1999 年的瑞士联邦宪法取代了 1874 年的宪法，反映了国家治理和价值观的重大变化。宪法的起草和通过都有瑞士人民的监督和直接参与，突出了瑞士治理的民主性和参与性。正式宪法的至高无上性也是一个基本方面。普通法律和政府政策必须符合宪法规定。就瑞士而言，这意味着所有立法，无论是联邦立法还是州立法，都必须符合 1999 年《联邦宪法》确立的原则。这种等级制度确保基本权利、民主原则和法治得到维护和保护。
宪法还规定了国家运作的基本规则。就瑞士而言，这包括联邦政府的结构、联邦与各州之间的权力划分以及对公民权利和自由的保障。例如，瑞士宪法确立了直接民主原则，允许公民通过全民公决和民众倡议在立法过程中发挥积极作用。因此，作为正式意义上的宪法，1999 年《瑞士联邦宪法》不仅仅是一份法律文件，它还反映了瑞士人民的价值观、历史和身份认同，在确定国家的社会和政治秩序方面发挥着核心作用。
作为一套成文规则，宪法在法律体系中的独特之处在于其形式优于其他规则。这种优越性尤其体现在修改宪法的程序上，该程序通常比适用于普通法律的程序更加严格和苛刻。修改宪法的程序凸显了宪法的特殊地位。与立法者可以相对容易地修改或废除的普通法律不同，修改宪法往往需要更为复杂的程序。这可能包括在立法院获得法定多数票等要求，甚至需要全民公决。这些更严格的要求反映了宪法作为国家原则和组织基石的根本作用，并确保不会轻易或在未达成广泛共识的情况下进行修改。例如，1999 年通过的瑞士联邦宪法取代了之前的 1874 年宪法，并使之现代化。这一过程不仅是一项立法工作，也是一项民主参与行动，因为它涉及全国公民投票。这表明了对人民意愿的尊重，以及对宪法作为国家法律和政治秩序基础的重要性的认可。修订程序的这种严格性确认了宪法作为国家最高准则的地位。它确保宪法的修改是深思熟虑和普遍同意的结果，而不是仓促或单方面的决定。这有助于法律和政治制度的稳定，确保宪法继续忠实地反映社会的基本价值观和原则。
与其他法律规范相比，正式意义上的宪法修订程序确实具有更严格和更民主的特点。这种严格性至关重要，因为宪法代表着国家的法律和政治基础，体现着国家的基本原则和价值观。修宪程序的严格性体现在对宪法文本的修改有更严格的要求。例如，在包括瑞士在内的许多国家，修改宪法不仅需要立法者的批准（通常是特定多数），而且在许多情况下还需要人民通过全民公决直接批准。这种特定多数和全民公决的要求确保了对宪法的任何修改都能反映集体意愿，而不是临时或党派政治决定的产物。另一方面，公民直接参与修宪过程也凸显了这一程序的民主性。在瑞士，直接民主在治理中发挥着核心作用，这一点在宪法修正案中尤为突出。全民公决为公民提供了一个独特的机会，直接表达他们对国家重大问题的看法，从而加强宪法修改的民主承诺和合法性。相比之下，通过、修改和废除普通法律的程序通常没有那么严格。这些法律通常只需议会简单多数通过即可修改，不需要系统地直接征求人民的意见。这种灵活性对于立法者有效应对不断变化的社会需求和发展是必要的。
在瑞士的法律框架中，《联邦宪法》的修订程序具有严格和民主要求高的特点，体现在全民公决和双重多数规则的要求上。这一程序强调了瑞士强大的直接民主传统，也反映了瑞士对联邦制的尊重。当瑞士提出修宪建议时，必须提交由瑞士选民直接参与的全国公民投票。这一规定确保对联邦宪法的任何修改都直接得到人民的批准。这一程序确保人民的意愿成为立法程序的核心，加强了宪法修改的合法性。除了人民的多数之外，宪法修正案还必须获得瑞士各州多数的批准，这是双重多数的第二个组成部分。这一要求反映了瑞士的联邦制结构，即在国家决策中认真考虑各州的利益。这一规则确保了宪法修正案不仅能得到广大民众的认可，也能为瑞士大多数联邦实体所接受，从而尊重了地区和文化的特殊性。瑞士历次重大宪法修订（如 1999 年宪法修订取代了 1874 年宪法）都体现了这一程序。这一重大修订涉及对瑞士政府的结构和原则进行重大修改，不仅要在全民公决中获得大多数瑞士公民的支持，还要获得大多数州的支持。这一过程不仅表明了瑞士的民主承诺，也确保了修改反映了国家和地区的共识。因此，瑞士的宪法修订需要双重多数，这表明瑞士致力于尊重人民意愿和各州之间的联邦平衡的治理。这一过程确保了对国家最高法律的根本性修改是经过深思熟虑和广泛同意的，有助于瑞士长期的政治和法律稳定。
实质意义上的宪法
实质意义上的宪法概念指的是一套规则，这些规则不论其形式或法律性质如何，都制约着国家的组织和运作以及政治权力的行使。这种宪法概念较少关注通过宪法的法律形式或正式程序，而更多关注规则本身的实质内容。从这一角度来看，实质意义上的宪法不仅包括正式承认为宪法的文件中规定的规则，还包括对国家运作和权力行使至关重要的其他规范、惯例和原则。这包括三权分立、尊重基本权利、政府各部门之间的平衡以及民主参与安排等原则。
例如，在某些法律体系中，治理和国家组织的关键要素可能并未正式载入宪法文本，但在实质意义上被视为宪法的组成部分。这可能包括宪法惯例、判例法确立的法律原则或根深蒂固的民主传统。就瑞士而言，尽管 1999 年《联邦宪法》是确定国家结构的正式文件，但实质意义上的宪法还包括不一定编入宪法文本的其他基本原则和惯例。例如，这可能包括通过全民公决和民众倡议实现直接民主的做法（这是瑞士治理的一个基本要素），或联邦法院制定的原则。
实质意义上的宪法包括一整套成文或不成文的基本规则，在确定国家的结构和治理方面发挥着至关重要的作用。这些规则不仅限于书面文件中的正式规定，还包括对国家运作方式有重大影响的惯例、传统和法律原则。国家结构是实质意义上宪法的关键要素之一，它由这些规则和原则确定。这包括国家各机关的组织方式、各自的关系以及立法、行政和司法之间的分权。例如，虽然《瑞士联邦宪法》正式规定了政府的结构，但随着时间的推移而形成的惯例和公约补充并丰富了这一结构。指定管辖权的方式是另一个重要方面。它决定了如何将权力和责任分配给各级政府，特别是在瑞士这样的联邦制国家，联邦和各州共享管辖权。这里的实质性规则不仅包括成文规定，还包括指导权力行使的解释和惯例。
各种国家机构的运作也受这些基本规则的制约。这涉及作出决定的方式、行使权力的方式以及各机构之间的互动方式。瑞士的直接民主（公民有权就重要问题直接投票）等要素是这一动态不可分割的一部分，即使它们超越了成文规定。最后，实质意义上的宪法界定了个人与国家之间的关系，特别是在公民权利和自由方面。虽然基本权利通常都写入了宪法文本，但其解释和适用却受到司法判决、公约和不成文法律原则的影响。
可以说，每个国家都有一部实质意义上的宪法，因为每个国家都制定了一套基本规则来界定其结构、运作方式以及与社会的互动方式。这些基本规则，无论是成文的还是不成文的，对任何国家的存在和运作都至关重要，因为它们为国家的政治和法律组织奠定了基础。实质意义上的宪法不仅限于书面文件或正式法律。它还包括交织在国家政治和社会结构中的原则、规范和惯例，即使这些原则、规范和惯例没有正式写入法律文本。例如，像英国这样的国家并没有一部编纂成单一文件的宪法，但它们确实有一套法律、公约和司法惯例，它们共同构成了实质意义上的宪法。
在每个国家，这些基本规则决定了政府的结构、权力分配和行使的方式、公民的权利和责任以及决策机制。它们确保政治和法律制度的连贯性和稳定性，是治理和解决冲突的框架。即使在瑞士这样拥有正式宪法的国家，实质意义上的宪法也不仅仅是书面文本。它包括直接民主等根深蒂固的民主实践，以及对法律和宪法原则的法理解释。
英国（或更广义地说，联合王国）的例子很好地说明了一个国家拥有实质意义上的宪法但没有形式意义上的宪法的情况。在英国的法律体系中，没有一个单一的、成文的文件被公认为国家宪法。相反，英国宪法是由成文法、公约、判例法和历史文件拼凑而成的。
英国宪法的主要原则之一是议会至上。这意味着议会拥有最终立法权，理论上只需简单多数即可制定或废除任何法律。这一原则与正式宪法限制和框定立法机构权力的制度明显不同。有几份历史文件被认为是实质意义上的英国宪法的一部分。1215 年的《大宪章》就是一个早期的例子，它确立了重要的正义原则并限制了国王的权力。1689 年的《权利法案》是另一份重要文件，它确立了限制君主权力、议会言论自由和某些公民权利等基本原则。除这些历史文件外，英国宪法还受到宪法惯例（不具法律约束力但遵循传统的做法和程序）和法院判决的影响，随着时间的推移，这些惯例和判决对治理进行了解释和塑造。这种制度具有一定程度的灵活性，因为它允许宪法根据社会和政治发展进行调整，而无需经过正式的宪法审查程序。不过，它也建立在根深蒂固的传统基础上，即尊重既定规范和对政治行为者的克制，从而保证了治理体系的稳定性和连续性。
以色列国提供了另一个有趣的例子，即一个国家拥有物质意义上的宪法，但没有正式意义上的宪法。以色列没有一部单一的正式宪法，而是由一系列基本法作为事实上的宪法。这些基本法虽然在宪法方面具有重要意义，但在通过或修订程序方面与其他普通法律没有区别。这些基本法涵盖了国家治理和组织的各个重要方面，如议会权力、公民权利和司法。自 1948 年建国以来，以色列在不同时期通过了这些基本法，它们共同构成了国家的宪法框架。以色列《基本法》的一个显著特点是，与普通法律一样，只需议会（以色列议会）的简单多数通过，即可对其进行修改。这与拥有正式宪法的国家形成鲜明对比，在这些国家，修改宪法往往需要更严格的程序和更多的多数票。虽然基本法被称为 "根本法"，但在法律地位或立法程序方面与普通法并无区别。这种缺乏正式区分的做法引发了有关以色列基本权利保护和宪法原则稳定性的问题，特别是在涉及可能影响权力平衡或公民权利的立法时。
瑞士宪法的修订过程
瑞士联邦宪法》的修订过程是国家治理和法律结构的一个重要方面。瑞士联邦宪法》第 193 条和第 194 条规定了全面或部分修订的细节。
根据《瑞士联邦宪法》第193条，《瑞士联邦宪法》可随时进行全部或部分修订。这种灵活性确保了宪法能够不断发展，适应社会、经济和政治的变化。全面修订，即彻底修改宪法，是一项重大工程，并不常见。瑞士宪法的上一次全面修订于 1999 年完成，取代了 1874 年的旧版本。部分修订则更为常见，涉及对宪法某些条款的具体修改。这些部分修订可以由议会提出，也可以通过民众倡议的方式提出，这是瑞士直接民主的一个显著特点。民众倡议允许公民提出宪法修正案，只要他们收集到所需数量的签名。
第194条规定了宪法修正案的批准程序。对宪法的任何修改，无论是全部还是部分修改，都必须获得双重多数的批准：瑞士人民的多数和各州的多数。这一双重多数要求确保了任何宪法修正案都能在国家和地区层面获得广泛支持，体现了瑞士的联邦制以及对瑞士不同地区、语言和文化社区的尊重。这一修订程序确保瑞士宪法始终是一份有生命力的文件，反映瑞士人民的价值观和愿望，同时维护国家法律和政治框架的稳定性和完整性。瑞士民主的一个关键要素是将修订的灵活性与通过修订必须达成广泛共识的要求结合起来，从而在连续性与适应新的挑战和社会需求之间实现平衡。
1999 年 4 月 18 日制定的《瑞士联邦联邦宪法》按照第 193 条的规定，以独特的民主 方式对宪法进行了全面修订。这一修订过程深刻体现了瑞士对直接民主和尊重国际法的承诺。修订宪法的可能性可由多个行为者发起：瑞士人民自己、两个立法委员会（国民议会或州议会）之一或整个联邦议会。这种多元化的启动机制确保了瑞士社会中的不同群体都能在制定宪法框架方面发挥积极作用。从历史上看，这一规定使瑞士宪法得以逐步发展，反映出社会态度、政治需求和国际背景的变化。
如果人民提出全面修改宪法的建议，或者两个委员会之间出现分歧，瑞士人民有权通过投票决定是否进行全面修改。这一原则加强了瑞士直接民主的性质，公民在重大宪法问题上拥有重要的监督权和决定权。1999 年的宪法修订取代了 1874 年的宪法，这一例子表明了这一程序的有效性，人民直接参与了对其基本法的全面修订。如果人民批准全面修订，两个理事会都将换届，确保修订工作由反映选民当前观点和愿望的代表执行。这一独特的规定确保了对宪法的任何重大修改都符合人民的当代观点。
最后，第 193 条着重强调对宪法的修订不得违反国际法的强制性规则。这反映了瑞士对国际准则的承诺及其作为国际社会成员的责任。尊重国际法是瑞士政策的基本原则，反映了瑞士作为中立国和众多国际组织东道国的历史角色。瑞士宪法的修订过程将直接民主、立法代表制和遵守国际法结合在一起，显示了瑞士如何在传统价值观和适应新现实之间保持平衡，确保其宪法对后代而言仍然是一份有生命力和相关性的文件。
瑞士联邦联邦宪法》第 194 条涉及宪法的部分修订，提供了一个对宪法进行具体修改 而无需全面修订的机制。这一程序是瑞士宪法框架灵活性和可发展性的关键因素。根据该条款，部分修改可以由人民通过民众倡议发起，也可以由联邦议会发起。这一条款允许民选代表和公民在修宪过程中发挥积极作用。人民有可能发起部分修订，这说明瑞士直接民主的力量，在瑞士，公民拥有影响立法的重要权力。
第 194 条还规定，任何部分修订都必须遵守主题统一的原则。这意味着拟议的修订必须连贯一致，并侧重于单一主题或专题。这一原则旨在避免混淆，确保修订内容清晰、重点突出、易于选民理解。此外，该条还强调，部分修订不得违反国际法的强制性规则。这种对国际准则的尊重符合瑞士对国际法的长期承诺，也符合瑞士作为一个尊重国际协定和条约的国家的声誉。最后，任何部分修改宪法的民众倡议都必须遵守形式统一的原则。这意味着提案必须以连贯和有条理的方式提出，使人民和立法机构更容易理解和评估。
瑞士的第一部正式宪法制定于1798年，是瑞士政治和法律发展史上的一个重要里程碑。在此之前，瑞士并不是一个现代意义上的统一国家，而是一个由联盟和条约网络连接起来的州联盟。瑞士联邦成立于 1291 年，当时签订的《联邦条约》被认为是瑞士的开国法案。该条约以及随后各州之间签订的条约建立了一个复杂的联盟网络，对瑞士各州之间的关系做出了规定。这些协定主要侧重于共同防御和管理共同事务，但并不构成正式意义上的宪法。这种邦联结构一直持续到1712年《阿劳和约》签订，标志着瑞士各州之间战争的结束。在此期间，瑞士的特点是权力下放，各州在管理和立法方面保持高度自治。瑞士没有中央文件或成文宪法来管理所有州。
1798 年，随着第一部正式宪法（通常称为《赫尔维蒂共和国宪法》）的出台，这种情况发生了改变。这部宪法受到法国大革命理想的影响，标志着瑞士与过去邦联制的重大突破。它引入了国家统一、中央集权和共同公民权等概念，为现代瑞士国家奠定了基础。这第一部正式宪法为瑞士随后的宪法和法律结构发展奠定了基础，最终导致了1848年《联邦宪法》的出台，确立了瑞士的现代联邦制结构。这些发展表明，瑞士是如何从一个分散的联盟网络演变成一个拥有正式、结构化宪法的统一联邦国家的。
1798年宪法是瑞士宪法史上的一个重要里程碑，因为它是瑞士第一部正式意义上的宪法。它标志着瑞士从根本上摆脱了以前各州之间的条约和联盟制度，引入了受法国大革命启发的思想，为中央集权制国家奠定了基础。1798 年的宪法被称为《赫尔维蒂共和国宪法》，是在法国入侵瑞士后实施的。它以中央集权政府取代了分散的邦联结构，建立了共同公民身份和统一管理的模式。然而，这部宪法并没有受到瑞士社会各界的欢迎，因为它意味着与州自治传统的重大决裂。
1848 年宪法是另一个决定性的转折点。它引入了联邦制结构，这也是今天瑞士政治体制的特点。受海尔维第共和国和1848年欧洲自由主义运动失败的启发，这部宪法力图在各州自治与建立强有力的中央政府之间取得平衡。它建立了联邦政府与各州分享权力的联邦制度，各州在其内部事务中保留一定程度的自治权。1848 年宪法奠定了现代瑞士政治制度的基础。它引入了联邦委员会、联邦议会和联邦最高法院等重要机构，并确立了直接民主、联邦制和中立等原则，这些原则至今仍是瑞士特征的基本要素。
瑞士《联邦宪法》修订的首要原则是可以随时修订，为根据社会需求和情况的变化进行修改提供了极大的灵活性。这一原则是重视直接民主和适应性的政治制度的基本原则。修订瑞士宪法的倡议可以由人民（民众倡议）或议会（议会倡议）发起。民众倡议需要收集一定数量的合格公民签名才能提出修宪建议，而议会倡议则从联邦议会开始。
根据《宪法》第195条规定的双重多数原则，修宪提案一经提出，必须同时获得瑞士人民和各州的批准。这意味着，宪法的（全部或部分）修改要想获得通过，不仅要在全国范围内的全民投票中获得多数票，还必须获得瑞士各州多数票的批准。这一双重多数要求确保了任何宪法修正案都能获得广泛支持，既能反映瑞士大多数人的意愿，又能征得瑞士不同地区和文化社区的同意。这一程序强调了协商一致和公平代表权在瑞士政治体制中的重要性，确保宪法修改经过深思熟虑和广泛同意。
宪法的部分修订和全面修订之间的区别是瑞士法律框架的一个重要方面，反映了宪法程序的灵活性和深度。宪法的部分修订侧重于修改一些具体条款。这样就可以在不质疑整个宪法框架的情况下进行有针对性的修改。部分修订通常用于满足特定需求或更新宪法的某些方面，以应对社会、经济或政治格局的变化。此类修订可由民众倡议或联邦议会发起，由公民团体收集必要的签名来提出修改建议。另一方面，全面修订涉及修改整部《宪法》。这意味着要重新审查并有可能重写整个宪法文件。这项工作要比部分修订复杂得多，影响也深远得多，因为它对国家法律和政治制度的根本基础提出了质疑。全面修订可以由人民或联邦议会提出，如果获得民众投票通过，则需要对两个议会进行更新，以反映当前人民的意愿。瑞士宪法上一次全面修订是在 1999 年，以取代之前的 1874 年宪法。根据瑞士直接民主和联邦制的传统，无论是全面修订还是部分修订，都必须经过人民和各州的批准。这种做法确保了对宪法的任何修改都是广泛共识和深思熟虑的结果，从而尊重了瑞士赖以生存的基本民主原则。
对瑞士宪法的任何修改，无论是全部还是部分修改，都必须尊重国际法的强制性规则，这是强调瑞士对国际法承诺的一项基本原则。这一条件对于维护瑞士法律体系的完整性和确保瑞士继续履行其国际义务至关重要。国际法的强制性规则通常被称为 "强制法"，是国际社会公认的一般国际法的基本准则，是不可改变的，任何国家都不得减损。它们包括禁止酷刑、种族灭绝和侵略以及尊重人权和基本自由等原则。通过将这一要求纳入宪法审查程序，瑞士正在确保其国内法，包括其宪法，不仅符合国际标准，而且反映了正义和人权的普遍原则。这表明了瑞士作为国际社会负责任成员的承诺，以及促进和支持全球和平与正义的愿望。在修宪过程中尊重国际法的必要规则，加强了瑞士在国际舞台上的信誉和尊重。它还说明了如何将国际原则和义务纳入国家法律框架，促进国内法与国际法的协调。
1999 年 4 月 18 日颁布的《瑞士联邦宪法》第 192 条规定了一项总原则，即《宪法》可随时进行全部或部分修订。这一原则体现了瑞士宪法框架的灵活性和适应性，使瑞士能够有效应对当代的发展和挑战。第 192 条第 1 款强调宪法可随时修订，为根据需要进行调整或更新提供了机会。这一规定保证了瑞士宪法不是一成不变的文件，而是一个可以随着社会、政治或经济的变化而发展的有生命力的框架。第二款规定，除非《宪法》或由《宪法》衍生的法律另有规定，《宪法》的修订遵循普通立法程序。这意味着拟议的修正案必须经过与其他法律相同的阶段，包括瑞士议会两院的审议和批准。然而，在实践中，由于宪法修订的重要性和范围，这些过程往往伴随着比普通法律更高层次的审议和共识。这一宪法修订框架反映了瑞士法律制度在稳定性和灵活性之间的平衡。它允许进行必要的调整，以反映瑞士社会当前的价值观和需求，同时保持有序和民主的程序，保证宪法修改过程中的合法性和慎重考虑。
1999 年修订的《瑞士联邦宪法》第 194 条规定了对宪法进行部分修订的框架，这 一程序体现了瑞士政治体制中直接民主与代议制民主的结合。通过这一程序，可以在不对宪法进行全面修订的情况下，对宪法的特定部分进行修改。部分修改既可以由瑞士人民通过民众倡议发起，也可以由联邦议会发起。这种由人民发起部分修订的可能性突出表明了瑞士立法过程中赋予公民的重要权力。特别是民众倡议，见证了瑞士直接民主的力量，使公民能够积极提出宪法修改建议。此外，还强调了在任何部分修订中主题统一的重要性，要求提议的修改必须连贯一致，并集中在一个主题上。这一规定旨在确保提议的修改内容明确且重点突出，避免因修改内容过于宽泛或多样而造成混乱。此外，该条还规定，修订不得违反国际法的强制性规则，这体现了瑞士尊重国际法律规范的承诺。
就民众倡议而言，形式统一原则是另一个重要方面。提案必须以连贯和有条理的方式提出，确保其表述清晰，公众和立法机构能够理解。这一要求确保民众倡议在付诸表决前经过深思熟虑。第 194 条的这些方面反映了瑞士在修宪方面的平衡和民主态度。它们确保对宪法的修改是经过深思熟虑、达成普遍共识的结果，并且符合瑞士的国际承诺和基本价值观。这表明瑞士是如何在适应当代发展的同时，在基本民主原则和尊重国际标准之间保持平衡的。
在瑞士，宪法倡议权使人民能够在宪法修订过程中发挥积极作用。这种形式的直接民主是瑞士政治制度的一个特点，使公民有机会直接影响立法。当有10万瑞士公民签署请愿书，要求在18个月内修改宪法时，就可以发起宪法倡议。10 万个签名的门槛确保了只有得到民众大力支持的提案才会被考虑。这一要求在促进民众参与与确保倡议得到认真考虑和相当一部分民众的支持之间取得了平衡。一旦某项宪法倡议符合这一标准，就必须经过瑞士人民以及各州的审议和投票程序。倡议必须获得双重多数才能通过：瑞士选民的多数和各州的多数。这一程序确保拟议的宪法修改不仅反映大多数人的意愿，而且能为瑞士各地区、语言和文化社区所接受。宪法倡议的存在证明了瑞士对直接民主的坚定承诺。瑞士政治体制的这一特点允许公民在制定法律和宪法框架方面发挥重要作用，体现了民主价值观和公民积极参与国家治理。
在对《瑞士联邦宪法》进行全面修订时，如果议会两院（国民院和联邦院）在批准修订倡议时出现僵局，则将决定权移交给瑞士选民。当两院无法就通过或否决一项全面修改宪法的提案达成一致时，就会出现这种情况。当这一问题付诸全民投票时，必须以一般的方式提出。这意味着瑞士人民是就全面修改宪法的原则进行投票，而不是就新宪法的具体修改或细节进行投票。一旦人民通过了全面修订的原则，新宪法的起草工作就会启动。
这一程序是瑞士直接民主运作的一个范例，它赋予人民决定对国家根本法进行重大修改的最终权力。如果人民同意全面修改的原则，议会两院将进行改组，以反映人民的当前意愿。新的两院随后负责起草新宪法文本。这一全面修订程序确保对宪法的根本性修改不仅是议会决定的结果，而且得到人民授权的支持。这表明瑞士致力于建立一种人民在重要宪法决策中发挥核心作用的政治制度，反映了瑞士社会根深蒂固的民主价值观。
全面修订《宪法》： 民众倡议和议会审查
在瑞士的宪法制度中，宪法的全面修订和部分修订之间的区别是以其制定和提出的方式为基础的。瑞士宪法的全面修订必须以概括的方式提出。这就意味着，当全面修订宪法的原则被付诸表决时，选民是对全面修订宪法的总体思路进行表决，而不是对修订的具体细节或内容进行表决。如果人民和各州批准了全面修订宪法的原则，新宪法的起草过程就开始了，这通常需要进行深入的辩论和广泛的合作，以确定新宪法的具体内容和结构。
另一方面，宪法的部分修订可以通过两种方式提出：笼统地提出或以草案的形式提出。在提出一般性建议时，只提出修订的原则或想法，而没有具体的文本，这与全面修订类似。然而，部分修订也可以草案的形式提出，在草案中拟定拟议修改的具体案文并提交审批。通过这种方法，可以对宪法的具体修改建议进行更有针对性的审查和辩论。这些宪法修正案的制定方法体现了瑞士宪法制度的灵活性和民主性。无论是对宪法框架进行全面更新，还是对宪法的具体内容进行有针对性的修改，都可以根据所需修 改的性质和程度进行调整。
就瑞士联邦宪法的全面修订而言，如果人民投票通过了全面修订宪法的倡议，那么接下来的重要一步就是：更新议会（联邦议会）和联邦委员会。当瑞士人民投票赞成全面修订宪法时，这表明他们希望对国家的宪法框架进行重大变革。为了反映这种变革愿望，并确保新宪法的起草精神能够代表民众当前的愿望，有必要对立法和行政机构进行革新。
议会换届意味着联邦议会两院，即国民院（下院）和州议会（上院）都要举行新的选举。这将确保参与起草新宪法的议员忠实地代表当时选民的政治授权和意见。同样，瑞士政府的执行机构联邦委员会的更新也是这一更新和代表性驱动力的一部分。联邦委员会负责执行法律，在国家管理中发挥着至关重要的作用。该机构的革新确保了行政机构与新宪法所确立的新的政治和立法框架保持一致。
在全面修订《宪法》的倡议获得批准后进行的这一更新过程，证明了瑞士治理结构的民主性和顺应性。它确保了重大的宪法修改具有充分的合法性，并反映了瑞士人民当前的愿望。
1999年修订的《瑞士联邦联邦宪法》第140条是瑞士致力于直接民主的杰出范例。根据该条款，某些重要决定，包括宪法修正案和国际组织成员资格，必须通过强制性全民公决获得人民和各州的批准。这一程序确保了国家治理和外交政策的重大变革得到直接的民主支持。
对宪法的修改，无论是全面修改还是部分修改，都必须得到人民和各州的批准。这一程序在1999年的宪法全面修订中至关重要，这次修订对宪法文本进行了全面更新，以更好地反映瑞士社会的当代现实和价值观。同样，任何有关瑞士加入集体安全组织或超国家团体的决定都必须经过这一民主过滤，这凸显了瑞士自治和中立的重要性。此外，被视为紧急且没有宪法依据的联邦法律，如果其有效期超过一年，也需要得到民众的批准。这一规定确保了即使在特殊情况下，人民的意愿仍然是最重要的。
此外，旨在全面修改《宪法》的民众倡议，以及联邦议会否决的旨在部分修改《宪法》的一般性倡议，都必须交由人民投票表决。这一原则已被多次应用，使瑞士公民对其宪法框架的发展拥有直接的权力。如果议会两院在全面修订原则上出现分歧，则由人民投票决定，从而确保这种根本性的分歧由选民直接决定。因此，第 140 条反映了瑞士政治制度的一个显著特点，即公民直接参与政府的重大决策不仅受到重视，而且已经制度化。这种做法确保了法律或国家政策的重大变革能够获得广泛共识，从而巩固了直接民主和联邦制在瑞士治理中的核心地位。
1999 年修订的《瑞士联邦宪法》第 193 条规定了全面修订宪法的程序。这一程序反映了瑞士政治制度的民主性和对国际法的尊重。根据第 193 条，宪法的全面修订可以通过三种不同的方式启动。首先，可以由瑞士人民提出，这体现了瑞士政治体制中直接民主的力量。其次，瑞士议会的两个理事会--国民议会或州议会--之一可以提出倡议。第三，全面修订可以由这两个委员会的联席会议--联邦议会本身颁布法令。
如果全面修订的倡议来自人民，或者两个委员会未能达成一致意见，则必须由瑞士人民通过全民公决来决定是否进行全面修订。这一步骤凸显了瑞士在重大宪法决策中对人民意志的重视。如果全面修宪得到人民的批准，第193条规定议会两院都要改选。这一规定确保了新宪法是由新当选的代表起草的，反映了瑞士人民当前的观点和期望。此外，第193条规定，宪法的全面修订必须尊重国际法的必要规则。这一规定强调了瑞士对国际法律规范的承诺，以及确保宪法修正案与其国际义务和原则相一致的愿望。
部分修改《宪法》的机制
根据瑞士的宪政制度，当一项支持对《宪法》进行部分修订的民众倡议在联邦议会获得批准后，立法程序的一个具体阶段就会启动，以落实该倡议。
一旦该倡议获得必要的支持并得到联邦议会的批准，联邦议会将负责起草部分修订的具体文本。这需要一个详细的起草过程，将倡议的总体内容转化为具体的立法提案。因此，由全国委员会和各州委员会组成的联邦议会致力于制定一个既能体现倡议精神，又具有法律可行性并与《宪法》其他部分保持一致的文本。部分修订案文定稿后，将交由人民和各州投票表决。根据瑞士的直接民主传统，这一投票对任何宪法修正案的通过都至关重要。文本必须获得全国大多数选民和各州大多数选民的批准。这一双重多数程序确保了宪法的部分修改获得广泛支持，反映了瑞士人民的意愿，并尊重了各州之间的联邦平衡。
部分修改宪法的程序说明了瑞士直接民主和代议制民主之间的动态互动。它允许公民提出修改宪法的建议，同时确保这些修改在通过之前经过仔细斟酌和评估。这确保了对宪法的修改既得到考虑，又得到民众的合法支持。
瑞士联邦联邦宪法》第195条明确规定，对宪法的任何修改，无论是全部还是部分修改，只有在得到人民和各州的认可后才能生效。这一原则强调了瑞士宪法程序的民主性，并确保宪法的修改得到广泛支持而合法化。根据该条款，宪法修正案的通过需要在全国公民投票中获得大多数瑞士选民和大多数瑞士各州的批准。这一双重多数要求是瑞士直接民主的基本要素，可确保对国家基本法的修改反映大多数公民的意愿，并考虑到地区利益。
这一程序确保对宪法的任何修改都能得到国家和州两级的民主支持，从而确保修改具有代表性和平衡性。这也体现了瑞士对联邦制的尊重，即各州在国家决策，特别是宪法问题的决策中发挥着重要作用。因此，第 195 条是瑞士致力于平衡各州自治和国家统一，同时允许公民直接参与政府重大决策的一个范例。这种做法确保了宪法的修订具有充分的合法性和共识性，反映了瑞士政治制度所依据的基本原则。
根据瑞士的直接民主制度，如果联邦议会否决了民众提出的部分修改宪法的倡议，它仍必须将该倡议提交人民投票表决。这意味着，即使该倡议未获得议会支持，瑞士公民仍有权直接决定其命运。这一过程被称为 "预先全民公决"，允许瑞士选民对倡议做出决定。如果人民投票赞成继续实施该倡议，联邦议会就必须根据该倡议起草一份宪法修订案文，并提交人民和各州重新投票表决。这一过程是瑞士直接民主运作的一个范例，它允许公民对政治决策产生直接影响，即使这些决策最初被他们选出的代表否决。事先全民公决是确保人民的声音在立法过程中得到倾听和尊重的重要机制。它表明瑞士致力于在代议制民主和直接民主之间保持平衡，代议制民主是由当选代表代表其选民做出决定，而直接民主则允许公民在政治决策中发挥积极和直接的作用。
1999 年修订的《瑞士联邦联邦宪法》第 139 条引入了瑞士民主制度中的一个重要机 制：部分修改宪法的民众倡议。这一程序允许 10 万名有投票权的瑞士公民提出部分修改宪法的建议。自倡议正式公布之日起，他们有 18 个月的时间来收集必要的签名。这一程序是瑞士直接民主的支柱，使公民能够积极参与宪法立法。民众倡议可以是一般性的，也可以是提案草案的形式。一般性倡议确定了修订的原则或总体思路，而草案倡议则提供了具体的文本。这种灵活性使公民能够通过提出新概念或建议具体的文本修改，为立法进程做出重要贡献。
联邦议会在这一过程中发挥着至关重要的作用。它对倡议进行审查，以确保倡议遵守形式统一和主题统一的原则，并符合国际法的强制性规则。如果倡议不符合这些标准，则可能被宣布无效。这确保了提案符合法律标准，内容一致。如果联邦议会批准了一般性倡议，则必须起草一份符合倡议精神的文本，然后提交人民和各州投票表决。如果联邦议会否决了该倡议，则将其付诸全民投票，让公民拥有最终决定权。如果倡议采取草案形式，则直接付诸表决，由联邦议会建议接受或拒绝，并可提出反建议。
这篇文章说明了瑞士在治理方面的承诺，即公民有直接和有意义的权利来制定宪法。历史上的一些例子，如关于各种社会和政治问题的民众倡议，证明了这一机制在塑造瑞士立法方面的有效性。瑞士允许公民提出宪法修订建议，并将这些建议付诸全民投票，从而确保其基本法律反映人民的意愿，并始终切合和顺应社会的变化。
根据瑞士的宪法制度，如果全民公决批准了部分修改宪法的民众倡议，联邦议会就有义务根据该倡议起草拟议的修订案文。这一过程说明了直接民主如何影响瑞士的立法。当一项措辞宽泛的倡议获得民众投票通过时，这表明选民支持修宪建议的原则或理念。随后，由国民议会和州议会组成的联邦议会负责起草反映倡议意图的法案。在这一过程中，需要认真考虑该倡议的法律和实际影响，以确保最终文本切实可行，与《宪法》其他部分保持一致，并尊重国际法准则。
联邦议会拟定修订草案后，将再次提交人民和各州投票表决。这就确保了由民选代表起草的宪法最终修订稿能够得到瑞士人民的直接民主认可。这一程序凸显了瑞士公民在制定宪法方面发挥的积极作用。它还确保了宪法的修改是人民与其当选代表之间持续对话的结果，反映了对民主和参与性治理的深刻承诺。
当瑞士的民众倡议产生了部分修改宪法的草案时，批准程序就涉及到一个关键的民主步骤：草案必须交由人民和各州投票表决。这意味着，要使草案中详细规定的具体宪法修正案生效，必须得到瑞士选民和大多数州的直接批准。在这一过程中，联邦议会发挥着重要的咨询和决策作用。联邦议会对草案进行审议并表明立场，建议接受或拒绝该草案。联邦议会还可对倡议提出反建议。这种反建议方案可以提供一种替代方案，更好地反映议会的意见，或以不同的方式解决原草案提出的问题。反提案还将提交人民和各州投票表决。在既有草案又有反提案的情况下，选民可在两个提案中做出选择，或同时否决两个提案。这一程序确保了宪法修订提案不仅反映人民的意愿，而且还受到民选代表的监督和认真审议。这种做法体现了瑞士的民主制度，即公民的直接参与与联邦议会的作用相平衡。它确保对宪法的修改是参与和深思熟虑的结果，保证修改得到广泛共识的支持，并与瑞士社会的需求和价值观保持一致。
自 1987 年以来，瑞士直接民主进程发生了一项重大变化，即人民和各州不仅可以对民众倡议进行投票，还可以对联邦议会提出的反建议进行投票。这一变化引入了 "双重赞成 "投票的概念，使选民在就宪法倡议进行全民公决时有了更大的选择灵活性。双赞成 "投票允许选民对民众倡议和反提案都投赞成票。这意味着他们既可以表示支持倡议的总体目标或想法，也可以倾向于反建议所提出的其他措辞或方法。这种制度的结果是，即使最初的民众倡议没有被直接采纳，但如果反建议被采纳，其精神或主要目标仍然可以实现，而反建议往往被视为一种更为温和或可行的妥协方案。
这一程序加强了瑞士的倡议权，原因有几个。首先，它鼓励联邦议会更经常地提出反建议，从而承认民众倡议所提出的问题的重要性。其次，它增加了民众倡议背后的想法得到实施的可能性，即使不是以最初提议的确切形式。最后，它使投票过程具有更大的细微差别和灵活性，使选民能够在支持倡议的同时，选择更加务实或可行的解决方案。因此，"双重赞成 "投票是瑞士不断调整其直接民主制度的一个例子，以更好地反映人民的意愿，同时确保决策过程的平衡和深思熟虑。
在 1987 年瑞士引入 "双赞成 "概念之前，对民众倡议和反倡议的投票过程具有不同的动力，有时会导致维持现状，即使大多数公民希望改变现状。在以前的制度下，当民众倡议和反建议同时付诸表决时，选民必须在两者之间做出选择，而不能选择对倡议的总体目标表示支持，同时又倾向于反建议的方式。这种情况造成了倡议和反建议之间的票数分散。在许多情况下，虽然大多数选民可能赞成某种形式的宪法改革（无论是通过最初的倡议还是反建议），但这一多数发现自己被分裂了，从而阻碍了任何宪法修正案。
这种票数的分散往往有利于维持现状。即使有相当一部分选民希望进行改革，但如果只能在原提案或反提案之间做出选择，就可能导致两者都无法获得通过所需的多数票。因此，尽管民众普遍希望进行改革，但立法和宪法制度仍保持不变。双赞成票 "的引入正是为了解决这一问题。通过允许选民同时支持提案和反提案，这一制度增加了某种形式的宪法改革获得通过的机会，反映了民众对改革的渴望。这一变化加强了瑞士直接民主的有效性，确保了改革的呼声不会被削弱，并增加了将人民的关切转化为立法行动的可能性。
在瑞士引入对民众提案和反提案都投 "赞成 "票的可能性之前，选民必须在两者之间做出选择，这可能导致选票分散。当选民总体上支持宪法改革，但又对最初的倡议和联邦议会提出的反建议意见不一时，这就构成了一个特殊的挑战。因此，即使大多数公民倾向于某种形式的宪法改革，这种投票的分散也往往有利于维持现状。对两个提案都投 "赞成 "票的可能性极大地改变了这一态势。它允许选民同时支持提案和反提案，从而更好地表明人民赞成变革的普遍意愿。这种 "双重赞成 "的选择方式可以更准确地衡量每项提案的支持率，同时防止赞成变革的选票在倡议和反建议之间被稀释。表决程序的这一变化加强了瑞士的倡议权。它使选民的意愿得到了更忠实的体现，确保了对宪法变革的偏好不会因被迫在两个选项中做出选择而受到阻碍。因此，无论是通过最初的倡议还是反建议，它都增加了某种形式的宪法变革获得通过的机会。投票程序的这一变化表明了瑞士对有效和有代表性的直接民主的适应性和承诺。
自 1848 年通过《瑞士联邦宪法》以来，该宪法经历了两次全面修订，一次是在 1874 年，另一次是在 1999 年。这些全面修订代表了瑞士政治和法律史上的关键时刻，根据社会和政治格局的发展做出了重大变革。瑞士宪法的设计允许一定程度的灵活性，这体现在民众倡议程序中。这一程序允许 10 万名有投票权的公民提议对宪法进行部分修改，显示了瑞士直接民主的力量。它为公民提供了影响国家基本法的直接而具体的手段，是国家民主愿望的具体体现。然而，尽管这一过程是可及的，但最终导致修宪的民众倡议确实为数不多。造成这一现象有几个因素。首先，在 18 个月内获得 10 万个签名是一项重大挑战，需要大量的组织和支持。其次，即使民众倡议通过了这一阶段，仍需获得大多数民众和各州的批准方可通过。这一投票过程要求提案得到瑞士民众的广泛支持和认可。最后，一项倡议的成功往往取决于其内容、及时性以及在民众和政治代表眼中的可接受性。过于激进、考虑不周或与社会当前关切脱节的倡议不太可能取得成功。
法律
法律的定义和范围
Law" is the form that rules take to become legally binding. The law is the means by which rules become legally binding. In any legal system, the law is an essential instrument that formalises the norms, guidelines and principles that govern society. It is the mechanism by which state authority establishes the rules that individuals and organisations are required to follow, and it provides a framework for regulating behaviour, resolving conflicts and protecting rights and freedoms. Laws are typically created through a legislative process, which involves the formulation, discussion and adoption of legislative texts by the relevant legislative bodies, such as parliaments or legislative assemblies. Once adopted and promulgated, these rules acquire legal force, which means that they can be applied by government institutions, including the courts. The law serves several essential functions in a society. It establishes standards of behaviour, offers clear predictions and expectations about the consequences of certain actions, and provides a mechanism for resolving disputes in a fair and orderly manner. Laws also help to protect individual rights and freedoms, by delimiting what the state can and cannot do, and by providing remedies for violations of those rights.
A law is an act adopted through a legislative procedure and containing rules of law. The law, as a legal act, is adopted according to a defined legislative procedure, which gives it official authority and binding force. It is an instrument by which the State, through its legislative institutions, establishes rules of law that govern the conduct of individuals, organisations and institutions within society. The legislative procedure involved in passing a law varies from one legal system to another, but generally consists of several key stages: proposal, examination, debate, possible amendments and, finally, adoption and promulgation of the law. This procedure ensures that the law is the result of a process of reflection and deliberation, and that it represents the collective will as expressed by the elected representatives of the people. The content of a law consists of rules of law that define rights and obligations, regulate relationships, establish standards of behaviour, and provide sanctions or remedies for non-compliance. These rules are designed to maintain social order, protect individual and collective rights, and promote justice and fairness within society. Once passed, a law has a higher authority than other forms of regulation or guidance, and there may be legal consequences if it is not complied with. Laws are enforced by the executive and interpreted by the judiciary, ensuring that they are applied and comply with the overall constitutional and legal framework.
Article 163 of the Federal Constitution of the Swiss Confederation, a key element of the country's legal framework, defines the way in which legislative acts are formalised by the Federal Assembly, Switzerland's national legislative body. This provision of the Constitution, incorporated in the major revision of 1999, carefully distinguishes between different forms of legislative acts, reflecting the methodical organisation and rigour of the Swiss legislative process. According to this article, the Federal Assembly issues rules of law in the form of federal laws or ordinances. Federal laws represent the highest level of legislative acts, adopted for important and often complex issues. These laws are the result of a thorough deliberation process within the Federal Assembly and must comply with the Constitution. Ordinances, on the other hand, are more detailed or technical regulations designed to implement or clarify federal laws. They are often used for administrative matters or to specify the details of existing laws. In addition, Article 163 introduces federal decrees, which are used for administrative or organisational decisions. These decrees are divided into two categories: those subject to referendum and simple federal decrees, which are not. Federal decrees subject to referendum are generally reserved for decisions of major importance and can be contested by popular vote, reflecting the principle of direct democracy in Switzerland. Simple federal decrees are used for matters that do not require direct consultation of the people.
This legislative system allows a clear distinction between different types of legislation, ensuring that each category is tailored to the specific nature of the issue being addressed. For example, the Federal Health Insurance Act, adopted in 1994, is an example of major legislation passed in the form of a federal law, reflecting its importance and complexity. On the other hand, the ordinances issued to regulate specific aspects of this law illustrate the use of ordinances for more technical details. Article 163 of the Swiss Constitution therefore ensures that the legislative process is both structured and flexible, enabling legislation to be adapted and effective, while incorporating the principles of direct and representative democracy that are at the heart of the Swiss political system.
A federal law in Switzerland is a law in both the formal and substantive sense, which underlines its importance and scope in the Swiss legal system. In the formal sense, a federal law is a legislative act that has been drafted, debated and adopted by the Swiss Parliament, made up of the National Council and the Council of States. This formal process ensures that the law has been subjected to scrutiny and democratic debate, reflecting the collective will of the elected representatives of the Swiss people. The process of drafting a federal law involves several stages, including the proposal, discussion in committee, debate in plenary session, and finally adoption by both houses of parliament. This formal process gives the law its authority and legitimacy. In the material sense, a federal law contains rules of law. This means that it establishes legally binding standards that govern behaviour, rights and obligations within society. Federal laws cover a variety of areas, such as civil law, criminal law, administrative law and constitutional law, and have a direct impact on the daily lives of citizens. The rules they contain are enforceable and serve as the basis for judicial and administrative decisions. Thus, a federal law in Switzerland is a complete legal instrument, incorporating both the formal process of its creation by Parliament and the material content of its provisions. It represents a balance between the democratic procedure of legislation and the establishment of clear and enforceable legal norms, which are essential to the maintenance of order and justice in Swiss society.
The definition of law in the substantive sense, as you have described it, effectively embraces a broad conception of law, focusing on its content rather than on the procedure for making it. This approach is essential for understanding the scope and application of laws in different legal systems, including Switzerland. In its broadest definition, law in the substantive sense encompasses all legal acts that set out rules of law. This includes not only laws passed by parliaments or legislative assemblies, but also constitutions, international treaties and regulatory acts issued by executive or administrative authorities. What characterises these acts as laws in the substantive sense is their content: they establish general and abstract norms that are applicable to a variety of situations and persons. In the Swiss context, laws in the material sense emanating from the Federal Assembly include provisions that set out rights, obligations and standards of behaviour. These laws are drawn up by the Federal Assembly, which consists of the National Council and the Council of States, representing the democratic process of legislation. Laws in the substantive sense may also be derived from other sources, such as Federal Council ordinances, which are regulatory acts detailing or implementing federal laws. Law in the substantive sense is an all-encompassing concept that designates any legal text that sets out general and abstract standards, whether it be laws adopted by legislative bodies, the constitution, international treaties or regulations. This conception of law emphasises its central role in structuring and regulating society, by providing a legal framework for interactions and behaviour within it.
Important norms can only be made in the form of formal law insofar as it is representative of the people. These formal laws are created through the legislative process and adopted by the elected representatives of the people, thus ensuring that important decisions reflect the will of the people and are the result of democratic debate. Under the Swiss legislative system, the Federal Assembly, made up of the National Council and the Council of States, plays a central role in drafting and adopting formal laws. Formal laws are legislative acts that have been carefully examined, debated and finally adopted by these representative chambers. This process not only guarantees the democratic legitimacy of the laws, but also allows for a thorough examination of the implications and consequences of the proposed rules. The adoption of important standards in the form of formal legislation ensures a degree of transparency and accountability. Elected representatives are accountable to their constituents for the laws they pass, and the open legislative process provides opportunities for public participation and comment. It also ensures that laws are consistent with the Constitution and the fundamental principles of the rule of law.
In Switzerland, formal laws deal with the most important and fundamental issues for society, such as the protection of human rights, economic regulation, the environment, public health and safety. By reserving the creation of important norms to the formal legislative procedure, Switzerland ensures that these crucial decisions are taken in a well-considered, representative manner and in accordance with democratic principles. The principle of reserving the law is the principle that requires important rules of law to be enacted in the form of legislation. However, the Constitution does not prohibit Parliament from dealing with a matter falling within the scope of Article 164 of the Constitution.
Article 164 of the Federal Constitution of the Swiss Confederation, a crucial element of the Swiss legal framework, stipulates that important legislative provisions must be enacted in the form of federal laws. This requirement reflects the importance of democratic representation and deliberation in the Swiss legislative process. The article specifies that federal laws must cover key areas such as the exercise of political rights, restrictions on constitutional rights, the rights and obligations of individuals, taxation aspects, the tasks and services of the Confederation, the obligations of the cantons in implementing federal law, and the organisation and procedure of the federal authorities. Historically, this approach has been adopted to ensure that significant legal decisions are taken with an appropriate level of democratic control. For example, reform of the Swiss healthcare system and changes to federal tax laws were dealt with by federal statute, reflecting their importance to the public welfare and the need for thorough debate and consensus.
In addition, Article 164 allows legislative powers to be delegated to other authorities, but only within the limits defined by the Constitution. This flexibility allows the government to respond more effectively to technical or specialist issues, while ensuring that the legislative process remains consistent with constitutional and democratic principles. However, this delegation is carefully controlled to avoid abuse of power and to maintain the legitimacy and transparency of the legislative process. Switzerland's approach, as illustrated by Article 164, strikes a balance between the need for an efficient legislative process and the preservation of representative democracy. It ensures that important laws, affecting the daily lives of citizens, are adopted in a considered and responsible manner, reflecting the collective will of Swiss society.
The Swiss Parliament, represented by the Federal Assembly, can delegate the power to enact legislation to the executive in the form of ordinances. This delegation is generally used when the executive, typically the Federal Council in Switzerland, is deemed to be better equipped to manage specific or technical aspects of a legislative matter. This delegation of power is a flexible legislative tool that allows a quicker and more specialised response to certain issues that may require technical expertise or a responsiveness that the traditional parliamentary legislative process cannot always offer effectively. For example, in areas such as environmental regulation, public health standards or financial regulation, where technical detail and specific expertise are required, the Federal Council may be better placed to draw up the appropriate regulations in the form of ordinances.
However, this practice is subject to constitutional limits. The Constitution stipulates that certain areas must be regulated by federal law and therefore cannot be delegated to the executive. This ensures that matters of the greatest importance, or those that affect the fundamental rights and freedoms of citizens, remain under the direct control of Parliament, thereby preserving the primacy of the democratic legislative process. The Swiss Parliament's ability to delegate the power to enact legislation in the form of ordinances reflects a balance between administrative efficiency and democratic oversight. It allows for flexible governance adapted to contemporary realities, while ensuring that essential areas remain under the direct legislative jurisdiction of Parliament.
Article 36 of the Federal Constitution of the Swiss Confederation is a fundamental pillar in the protection of human rights in the Swiss legal framework. This article stipulates that any restriction of a fundamental right must not only have a solid legal basis, but must also be justified, proportionate and respect the very essence of fundamental rights. The need for a legal basis for any restriction means that limitations on rights cannot be imposed arbitrarily. They must be established by law, thus ensuring a democratic and transparent process. In the case of serious restrictions, the Constitution requires that such limitations be explicitly mentioned in a formal law, thus ensuring thorough debate and reflection. However, in exceptional situations, where there is a serious, direct and imminent danger, restrictions may be imposed even in the absence of a formal law, although this remains an exception.
A historical example of the application of this article can be seen in the measures taken by Switzerland in emergency situations, such as health crises or security threats. In these cases, although restrictions were imposed to protect public health or national security, they had to be justified by a legitimate public interest, such as protecting the life and health of citizens. In addition, Article 36 emphasises that any restrictions must be proportionate to the aim pursued. This means that the measures taken must not be excessive and must be appropriate to the objective pursued. This proportionality requirement is a key principle in ensuring that fundamental rights are not unnecessarily or unfairly restricted. Finally, the Article affirms that the essence of fundamental rights is inviolable, thus establishing a core of inalienable rights that cannot be restricted under any pretext. This provision protects fundamental rights such as human dignity, ensuring that even in extreme circumstances, respect for the human person remains paramount.
Two fundamental aspects of the legislative process in Switzerland should be highlighted, concerning both the primacy of the legislature in important areas and the possibility of delegating legislative powers. Firstly, in areas deemed important, decision-making is reserved for the legislator, i.e. the Federal Assembly, which is the Swiss parliament. This means that for essential matters - such as those affecting constitutional rights, tax obligations or the organisation of the State - the law-making process must follow the formal legislative procedure. This includes the proposal, debate, amendment and voting of laws by both houses of parliament, the National Council and the Council of States. This process ensures that laws in these crucial areas are the result of careful scrutiny and democratic deliberation, reflecting the collective will and values of Swiss society. Secondly, the Swiss Parliament has the ability to delegate the power to pass certain laws to other bodies, often to the Federal Council, which is the executive arm of government. This delegation is, however, subject to constitutional limits. This means that for certain areas specifically reserved by the Constitution for Parliament's legislative competence, no delegation is possible. Delegation is generally used for more technical or specialised matters, where the executive's expertise and flexibility are particularly useful.
This ability to delegate allows a degree of flexibility in the Swiss legislative system, enabling a more rapid and specialised response to issues that may require technical expertise or responsiveness that the traditional legislative process cannot always provide effectively. However, this is balanced by the need to maintain the primacy of the democratic legislative process for issues of the greatest importance. The Swiss legislative system, as illustrated by these principles, shows a balance between the need for democratic and representative legislation for important issues and the flexibility offered by the delegation of powers for more technical or specific matters. This guarantees both effective governance and respect for democratic and constitutional principles.
The intrinsic characteristics of the Swiss political system, in particular the referendum and the popular will, are at the heart of its direct democracy. These elements illustrate Switzerland's deep commitment to citizen participation in the political and legislative process. The referendum is a key tool of direct democracy in Switzerland. It allows citizens to vote directly on a range of issues, from laws passed by parliament to constitutional amendments and major political decisions. In Switzerland, there are two types of referendum: the optional referendum, which can be triggered by a certain number of citizens' signatures against a law passed by parliament, and the mandatory referendum for certain major decisions, such as revisions to the Constitution or membership of supranational organisations. These mechanisms ensure that Swiss citizens have a direct and meaningful say in the laws and policies that affect them. The will of the people is a fundamental principle of the Swiss political system. It manifests itself not only through referendums, but also through popular initiatives, where citizens can propose changes to the Constitution. This principle recognises that sovereignty resides with the people and that citizens have the power to actively shape their country's legislation and politics. Popular initiatives require the collection of a specified number of signatures in order to be considered, which ensures that only proposals with significant support among the population can progress. The characteristics of referendums and popular will in Switzerland reflect a system in which citizen participation is valued and facilitated. These elements of direct democracy allow for a concrete expression of the popular will, ensuring that political and legislative decisions reflect the desires and concerns of Swiss citizens.
The legislative process
The legislative process in Switzerland begins with the crucial initiative stage, which is the starting point for any bill. The initiative can come from either Parliament or the Federal Council. This initial stage is essential because it defines the direction and content of the legislative proposal. Parliamentary initiatives reflect the diversity of opinions and interests represented in Parliament, while Federal Council initiatives are generally based on administrative considerations or the need to react to specific developments. Once a proposal has been accepted and approved by Parliament, it enters the drafting phase. This phase is carried out under the supervision of the Federal Council, in coordination with the Federal Office of Justice. This collaboration ensures that the preliminary draft is legally sound and meets legislative and constitutional requirements. The involvement of the Federal Office of Justice is particularly important to ensure that the draft is legally sound and in line with existing principles and standards. Once the draft bill has been drawn up, it is submitted to a consultation process. During this stage, the draft is circulated to various government departments and other stakeholders for their views and comments. This consultation process allows diverse perspectives to be incorporated and potential problems or improvements to be identified before the draft legislation is finalised. Departments and stakeholders can offer criticisms or suggestions, thereby helping to improve and refine the bill. This initial process in the Swiss legislative cycle demonstrates a commitment to a democratic, transparent and inclusive process. It not only allows for broad participation in shaping legislation, but also ensures that proposed laws are well thought-out, balanced and representative of the diverse interests and needs of Swiss society.
The consultation procedure in Switzerland is a key stage in the legislative process, and is characterised by its inclusive and democratic nature. This stage is essential for the development of well-founded legislation and treaties that are representative of the various perspectives within Swiss society. During the consultation procedure, the cantons, political parties and various interest groups are invited to give their opinions on important draft legislation, large-scale projects currently under development and significant international treaties. This invitation to participate in consultation is an established practice that allows a wide range of stakeholders to contribute to the legislative process. The cantons, as political entities within Switzerland's federal structure, play an important role in representing regional and local interests. Political parties bring the perspectives of their electoral bases, while interest groups such as professional associations, trade unions, non-governmental organisations and other civil society groups offer specific expertise and views on issues affecting their respective areas. Consultation has a constitutional basis in Switzerland, which underlines the importance of this process in Swiss legislation. By formally recognising the consultation procedure, the Constitution ensures that the law-making process is not only a governmental process, but also a participatory one that reflects the democratic character of the country. The involvement of cantons, parties and different interest groups ensures that laws and treaties are not just the result of parliamentary deliberations, but also the product of a wider process of engagement and consultation. This allows potential concerns to be identified, diverse and often competing interests to be balanced, and solutions to be worked towards that enjoy broad support. In short, the consultation procedure in Switzerland is an example of how participatory democracy can be integrated into the legislative process to improve the quality and acceptability of laws and policies.
Article 147 of the Federal Constitution of the Swiss Confederation formally establishes the consultation procedure, an essential element of the Swiss legislative process that underlines its commitment to participatory democracy. According to this article, the cantons, political parties and interested parties are invited to express their opinions on important legislative projects, far-reaching projects during preparatory work, and significant international treaties. This consultation procedure allows for extensive participation in the process of creating laws and policies in Switzerland. The cantons, as sub-national entities within the country's federal structure, play a crucial role in providing regional and local perspectives. Political parties, representing a range of ideological and political views, also contribute to the richness of debate and deliberation. In addition, the participation of stakeholders, including non-governmental organisations, professional associations, trade unions and other civil society groups, ensures that the voices of different sectors of society are heard. This diversity of opinion and expertise contributes to the development of policies and laws that are more balanced, well-informed and responsive to the needs and concerns of society as a whole. In addition, the inclusion of important international treaties in the consultation process reflects Switzerland's recognition of the growing importance of international issues and agreements. This ensures that decisions taken in the field of international relations also benefit from careful consideration and broad input, taking into account the impacts and implications for Switzerland in a global context. Article 147 of the Swiss Constitution is an example of how a political system can effectively integrate democratic participation into the legislative process, thereby enhancing the legitimacy, transparency and acceptability of laws and policies.
The consultation process in Switzerland, as enshrined in the Constitution, plays a vital role in the development of legislation and public policy. Once a draft bill has been drawn up, it is sent by the Federal Chancellery to the various departments concerned for consultation. This initial internal consultation stage ensures that the draft is examined and evaluated by the various branches of the federal government, each contributing its expertise and point of view on the issues addressed in the draft. Once the draft has been revised and refined following this internal consultation, it enters a broader phase of external consultation. This stage is crucial because it opens up the process to a wider range of stakeholders. The cantons, as federated entities, are being invited to give their views, which is essential to ensure that regional and local perspectives are taken into account. Political parties, representing different spectrums of public and ideological opinion, are also consulted, ensuring that diverse political positions are considered. In addition to the cantons and political parties, representatives of interested parties such as non-governmental organisations, industry groups, trade unions and other experts are also consulted. Their participation brings specialist and technical perspectives to bear and ensures that the interests and concerns of different sectors of society are taken into account in the drafting of legislation. This multi-dimensional approach to the consultation process ensures that the legislative process in Switzerland is not only democratic and transparent, but also inclusive and responsive to the needs and concerns of society as a whole. By incorporating the views of multiple stakeholders from the earliest stages of the legislative process, Switzerland ensures that its laws and policies are well-founded, balanced and representative of the diversity of interests and opinions within the country.
The processing of the bill by the Federal Council is a key stage in the Swiss legislative process, following the consultation phase. This stage involves careful revision and finalisation of the bill, as well as the preparation of an official recommendation. Once the consultation procedure has been completed, the relevant federal department proceeds to draft the bill. This drafting process takes into account the feedback and suggestions received during the consultation, as well as the Federal Council's specific directives and instructions. This ensures that the bill not only conforms to the government's political and legal objectives, but also reflects the contributions and concerns of the various stakeholders involved in the consultation process. After this drafting stage, the Federal Council proceeds to the final examination and adoption of the text of the bill. At this stage, the Federal Council assesses the draft in its entirety, ensuring that it is coherent, legally sound and in line with the government's political and legislative objectives. Once the text has been adopted by the Federal Council, an official commentary is published in a document known as a "message". This message accompanies the bill when it is submitted to Parliament for debate and vote. It provides a comprehensive overview of the bill, including the reasons for its introduction, the objectives it seeks to achieve, and the considerations that influenced its formulation. The Federal Council's message plays a crucial role in the legislative process, as it helps members of parliament to understand the background and motivations behind the bill, thereby facilitating informed consideration and debate. The Federal Council's handling of the bill is an essential step in ensuring that the laws proposed in Switzerland are the result of a rigorous, transparent and inclusive process. This stage ensures that laws are well prepared, justified and ready for thorough parliamentary scrutiny.
The fourth stage of the Swiss legislative process involves the transmission of the draft law to Parliament, a crucial phase in which the draft is subjected to scrutiny and debate by the nation's elected representatives. Once the Federal Council has finalised the bill and drafted the corresponding dispatch, it is forwarded to the two chambers of the Swiss Parliament: the National Council and the Council of States. The bill, together with the Federal Council's message, is published in the Federal Gazette, the official newspaper of the Swiss government. This document is essential for informing members of parliament, as well as the public, about the content of the bill and the government's reasons for proposing it. In Parliament, the bill is first allocated to a chamber, which takes responsibility for examining it first. The decision as to which chamber the bill is submitted to first depends on a number of factors, including the subject of the bill and parliamentary practice. A parliamentary committee is then responsible for examining the bill in detail. This committee studies the bill, holds hearings and prepares a report for the chamber. When the priority chamber takes up the bill, it votes on whether or not to enter into a full debate on the bill. If the vote is positive, the chamber discusses and debates the bill clause by clause, making amendments if necessary. If the vote is negative, the bill is forwarded to the other chamber for consideration. The second chamber follows a similar procedure, examining the bill and issuing a report. If this chamber accepts the bill, it also enters into the matter. However, if the second chamber also rejects the bill, it is withdrawn and considered rejected. This parliamentary process is an example of how the Swiss legislative system ensures that proposed laws are carefully considered, debated and amended if necessary by elected representatives, thereby ensuring that the laws passed reflect the collective will and interests of Swiss society as a whole.
The next phase of the Swiss legislative process involves a "shuttle game" between the two chambers of parliament, the National Council and the Council of States, to resolve differences over a bill. This stage is crucial to achieving consensus on the legislative text. When the two chambers have differing opinions on certain aspects of a bill, the text is sent from one chamber to the other, in an iterative process designed to harmonise their positions. Each chamber examines the changes proposed by the other and can either accept them or propose other changes. This shuttle process continues until agreement is reached on all parts of the bill. This shuttle process ensures that the final text of the bill is the product of full deliberation and represents a compromise acceptable to both houses. In situations where differences persist and agreement seems out of reach, a conciliation conference can be set up. This conference is a committee made up of members of both chambers and aims to find a compromise solution. It is particularly useful in cases where one chamber wants to proceed to a full examination of the bill (an entrée en matière) and the other does not. The conciliation conference plays a mediating role, proposing solutions to overcome disagreements and allow the bill to move forward. If the Conciliation Conference succeeds in reaching a compromise, it is then submitted to both houses for approval. If both houses accept the conciliation conference's proposal, the bill can move forward. However, if no agreement is reached, even after conciliation, the bill is generally considered rejected. This shuttle system and the conciliation conference are examples of how the Swiss legislative process fosters consensus and collaboration between the different branches of government. They reflect the country's commitment to a democratic, inclusive and representative legislative process.
The next stage in the Swiss legislative process involves the Drafting Committee, which plays a crucial role in preparing the final text of the law. Once the two houses of parliament, the National Council and the Council of States, have agreed on the content of the bill, it is sent to the Drafting Committee. The main responsibility of the Drafting Committee is to ensure that the text of the law is clear, coherent and legally correct. It scrutinises the text to correct any errors, clarify the wording and ensure the overall coherence of the document. A unique and important aspect of this process in Switzerland is the drafting of the text in the country's three official languages: German, French and Italian. As Switzerland is a multilingual country, it is essential that the laws are available and understandable to all citizens, whatever their mother tongue. The Drafting Committee therefore ensures that the text of the law is correctly translated into each of these languages, while maintaining the same meaning and content in all language versions. This multilingual drafting stage is essential to guarantee the accessibility and fairness of the legislative process in Switzerland. It reflects the country's respect for its linguistic and cultural diversity and its commitment to inclusive and representative government. After this drafting and translation phase, the final text of the law is ready to be promulgated and implemented.
After the drafting and translation phase by the Drafting Committee, the bill in Switzerland reaches a crucial stage: the final vote in both houses of parliament. This stage is decisive in the legislative process, as it marks the final decision on whether or not the bill should be adopted. The final text of the bill, drafted in German, French and Italian to reflect Switzerland's linguistic diversity, is submitted separately to the National Council (the lower house) and the Council of States (the upper house). Each chamber holds a final vote on the bill. This vote is the culmination of the entire legislative process, including the initiation of the law, the discussions and amendments, the consultation and conciliation phases, and the final drafting. For a bill to be passed, it must receive the approval of a majority in each chamber. If one of the chambers rejects the bill, it is deemed to have been rejected, unless the points of disagreement can be resolved by other means, such as a further conciliation conference. If the bill is approved by both chambers, it then moves on to the enactment stage, where it is signed by the presidents of both chambers and the President of the Confederation, before being published in the Official Compendium of Federal Legislation. The final vote in both chambers is a key moment that ensures that all laws passed in Switzerland have been subject to a thorough democratic process, reflecting a broad consensus among the elected representatives of the people. This concludes the Swiss legislative process, which is characterised by its rigour, transparency and respect for diversity and democracy.
The next stage in the Swiss legislative process is the publication of the law in the Federal Gazette, which triggers a crucial period for the optional referendum. After final approval of the bill by both houses of parliament, the law is officially published in the Federal Gazette. This marks the start of the 100-day referendum period, during which the law is subject to the optional referendum process. This mechanism of direct democracy is a distinctive feature of the Swiss political system, allowing citizens to play an active role in legislation. During these 100 days, a referendum may be requested by at least 50,000 citizens entitled to vote or by eight cantons. This requirement ensures that only laws that cause significant concern or interest among the population or the cantons will be put to a referendum. The threshold required to trigger a referendum reflects Switzerland's commitment to citizen participation while ensuring that the process is not used for trivial matters or without a genuine support base. If the referendum is called within the deadline, the law will only take effect if it is approved by the Swiss people in a national vote. This means that even after going through all the stages of the legislative process, a law can still be challenged by a direct vote of the people. This aspect of the Swiss system illustrates the power given to citizens in legislative decision-making, reinforcing the democratic nature of the country's system of governance. If no referendum is requested within 100 days, the law is automatically promulgated and comes into force according to the terms specified in the legislative text. This final process of publication and referendum period ensures that laws in Switzerland are not only the result of a representative democratic process, but are also subject to the direct approval of the people, if necessary.
If, after being submitted to an optional referendum, the law is accepted by the Swiss people, it passes the final stage before becoming fully effective. In this case, the law is officially published in two key documents: the Official Compendium of Federal Legislation and the Systematic Compendium of Federal Law. The Official Compendium of Federal Legislation is the official publication where all new laws and legislative amendments are recorded. This publication is essential for informing the public and institutions about current and official legislative changes in Switzerland. Publication in the Official Compendium is the final step confirming that the law is in force and must be complied with. At the same time, the law is also published in the Systematic Compendium of Federal Law, which is an organised compilation of all Swiss federal legislation. The Compendium is structured systematically to make it easier to access and understand the laws in force in the country. Publication in this compendium helps to maintain a clear and accessible overview of Swiss legislation, enabling citizens, legal professionals and other interested parties to find relevant legal information easily. Approval by the people and subsequent publication of the law in these official compendia underline the importance of direct democracy in the Swiss legislative system. They ensure that the laws adopted reflect not only the will of elected representatives, but also the direct approval of Swiss citizens. This final stage also ensures the transparency and availability of legal information, key elements in a democratic system where access to legal information is crucial to the exercise of civic rights and responsibilities.
Once all the previous stages of the Swiss legislative process have been successfully completed, including approval by both chambers of parliament, publication in the Federal Gazette, the possible referendum process, and finally publication in the Official Compendium of Federal Legislation and the Systematic Compendium of Federal Law (if applicable), the law is officially adopted and comes into force. The final adoption of a law in Switzerland represents the culmination of a rigorous and participatory democratic process. This stage confirms that the law has not only won the support of the people's elected representatives in Parliament, but has also passed the test of acceptance by the Swiss people in cases where a referendum has been requested and organised. Bringing the law into force means that it becomes a legally binding rule that must be respected by all citizens and institutions. The law may come into force immediately or on a date specified in the text of the law. Once adopted, the law has a direct effect on society, influencing behaviour, regulating activities, protecting rights and freedoms, and establishing responsibilities and obligations. The adoption of a law in Switzerland, by following this methodical and inclusive process, illustrates the country's commitment to a legislative system that is transparent, democratic and respectful of the principles of the rule of law. This ensures that laws are well-founded, legitimate and reflect the values and needs of Swiss society.
The enactment of a law in Switzerland is the culmination of a complex and well-structured democratic process, marking the formalisation and entry into force of legislation. The enactment process varies depending on whether or not the law has been put to a referendum. If a law is the subject of a referendum, and the Swiss people approve the law in the referendum, the Federal Council plays a crucial role by officially validating the result of the referendum. This formal step is significant because it recognises the democratic choice made by the people. For example, in popular votes on issues such as healthcare reform or changes to environmental laws, the validation by the Federal Council after a favourable vote by the people is a formal confirmation that the law has been adopted. If the law has not been submitted to a referendum, promulgation occurs automatically after the 100-day referendum period has expired, provided that no request for a referendum has been filed. In this case, the Federal Chancellery is responsible for recording the expiry of the referendum deadline. This procedure ensures that the law is only enacted if there is no opposition strong enough to justify a referendum. This has been the case for many less controversial or more technical laws, where the referendum deadline has passed without significant opposition, allowing the law to be promulgated without a hitch. Enactment is therefore a crucial step, confirming that the law has passed all the necessary stages of the Swiss legislative process, from its proposal to its parliamentary consideration, via public consultation and, if necessary, approval by referendum. It symbolises Switzerland's respect for representative and direct democracy, ensuring that every law adopted is the result of a transparent, inclusive and legitimate process.
In Switzerland, the publication of a law is one of the last stages in the legislative process, and it is at this point that the law is officially brought to the attention of the public. Publication is essential because it marks the point at which the law is considered to be officially in force and applicable. The Act is published in the Official Compendium of Federal Statutes, which is the main tool for disseminating legislative texts to the public. This publication is crucial not only for reasons of transparency and democratic governance, but also because it informs citizens, businesses, institutions and legal players about new laws and regulations in force. It is essential for citizens to be informed about laws, as this enables legislation to be applied and complied with effectively. Publication in the Official Compendium is also a fundamental principle in law, known as the principle of publicity of laws. This principle states that for a law to be enforceable, it must be made public. In Switzerland, this means that the law is not only passed by Parliament and promulgated by the Federal Council, but is also accessible to all citizens. The practice of publishing laws ensures that all players in Swiss society are informed of legislative changes and can adjust their behaviour accordingly. This ensures that the law is applied uniformly and that citizens can exercise their rights and obligations in full knowledge of the rules in force.
The entry into force of a law in Switzerland represents the final stage in the legislative process, where the law becomes binding and enforceable. This stage occurs after the publication of the law, which is a crucial element in informing the public of the new legislation. Once the law has been passed by Parliament, promulgated by the Federal Council and published in the Official Compendium of Federal Statutes, it attains the status of a legally binding rule. The Act may come into force immediately, i.e. as soon as it is published, or it may come into force at a later date specified in the text of the Act. This provision allows a degree of flexibility so that citizens and institutions can adapt to new legal requirements. The date of entry into force is essential because it marks the moment from which the provisions of the law are enforceable. From this date, citizens and institutions are legally obliged to comply with the new legislation. This means that behaviour, actions and transactions must be aligned with the provisions of the law. The importance of entry into force lies in its role in ensuring that laws are not just recommendations or guidelines, but binding rules of conduct. This ensures that the law is respected and applied uniformly, thereby guaranteeing legal order and stability in society. In short, the entry into force of a law in Switzerland is the culmination of a democratic and transparent process, marking the transition from a legislative proposal to an effective legal rule that shapes the structure and functioning of Swiss society.
In Switzerland, the emergency clause is a special provision that allows a law to come into force immediately in exceptional situations. When a law is deemed urgent, it can be applied as soon as it has been passed by Parliament, without waiting for the usual process of promulgation and publication. Declaring a law urgent requires a qualified majority of the members of each council of the Swiss parliament - the National Council and the Council of States. This majority requirement ensures that the decision to declare a law urgent is not taken lightly, but rather in circumstances where swift action is essential to respond to critical situations or immediate needs. Situations justifying such a measure may include national crises, public health emergencies, natural disasters or other exceptional circumstances where a delay in the application of a law could have serious consequences. For example, during a health crisis such as an epidemic, urgent legislation may be required to enable a rapid and effective response to protect public health. By passing laws with the emergency clause, the Swiss Parliament ensures that the government has the necessary tools to act promptly in response to unforeseen and urgent situations. However, this procedure is subject to controls to prevent abuse, ensuring that the emergency clause is used responsibly and only in justified situations.
Article 165 of the Swiss Federal Constitution plays a crucial role in the country's legislative framework, allowing laws to be passed quickly in urgent situations, while maintaining a balance with democratic principles. This constitutional provision enables Parliament to react effectively and immediately in exceptional circumstances that require rapid intervention, such as national crises or emergency situations. The adoption of urgent legislation requires the approval of a majority of the members of each House of Parliament. These laws, characterised by their temporary nature, are designed to meet immediate and specific needs. A relevant historical example might be legislation in response to a health crisis, where rapid action is required to protect public health. Despite their urgent nature, such laws are not exempt from democratic scrutiny. If a referendum is called against an urgent law, the law expires one year after its adoption if it is not accepted by the people. This ensures that even in emergency situations, laws remain subject to popular approval. For example, an emergency law passed to deal with an economic crisis could be put to a referendum, giving the Swiss people an opportunity to vote on measures taken in their name. Furthermore, if an urgent law has no constitutional basis, it must be approved by the people and the cantons within one year of its adoption. This provision ensures that laws passed in extraordinary circumstances without a direct constitutional basis receive special attention and democratic approval. Article 165 also stipulates that emergency laws that fail to win approval in a vote may not be renewed, thereby emphasising the temporary and exceptional nature of such measures. This mechanism ensures that emergency laws are not used in a prolonged or inappropriate manner. Article 165 reflects Switzerland's ability to balance the need for rapid government action in emergencies with respect for democratic processes and the participation of the Swiss people in legislative decision-making. It is an illustration of how a country can maintain legal order and stability while preserving democratic foundations, even in extraordinary circumstances.
The referendum mechanism in Switzerland, particularly in relation to laws enacted under the emergency clause, is an essential element of democratic control in the legislative process. Even when a law is passed quickly under the emergency clause and comes into force immediately, it remains subject to the possibility of a referendum. If an urgent law that complies with the Constitution is brought into force and a referendum is then requested, the law faces a critical period of democratic validation. In accordance with Article 165 of the Swiss Constitution, this urgent law ceases to be effective one year after its adoption by the Federal Assembly if it is not approved by the Swiss people within this period. This mechanism ensures that, despite the need for rapid action in an emergency, democratic consent remains a fundamental pillar of the legislative process. The referendum process allows Swiss citizens to exercise direct control over laws, even those passed in extraordinary circumstances. For example, if the Swiss government were to pass an urgent law in response to an environmental or economic crisis, citizens would have the right to request a referendum on that law. If a referendum is called and the law is not approved by popular vote within a year of being passed, it would cease to have effect. This mechanism illustrates how the Swiss political system balances government efficiency and responsiveness with democratic participation and control. It ensures that even legislative measures taken in emergency situations do not deviate from the principles of direct democracy that lie at the heart of the Swiss political system.
When an emergency law is passed in Switzerland and found to be contrary to the Constitution, the referendum process requires a higher level of validation: the double majority. This means that for the law to remain in force, it must be approved not only by a majority of the Swiss people, but also by a majority of the cantons. This double majority process is a distinctive feature of Swiss democracy, particularly in cases where emergency laws touch on constitutional aspects. The requirement for approval by both the people and the cantons ensures that changes to the law, even in an emergency situation, receive broad and representative support across the country. This reinforces respect for Switzerland's federal structure and ensures that the interests and opinions of all regions are taken into account. If a referendum is requested against an emergency law that affects the Constitution, and that law does not receive the necessary support of the double majority (the people and the cantons) within a year of its adoption, it ceases to be valid. This control mechanism ensures that laws that have a direct impact on the Constitution - the country's fundamental law - cannot be upheld without clear and widespread democratic support. This process underlines the importance attached in Switzerland to the protection of constitutional principles and democratic participation, even in emergency situations. It ensures that emergency laws, particularly those that could run counter to constitutional principles, are subject to rigorous scrutiny and democratic approval, reflecting the country's deep respect for its democratic and federal foundations.
The decree
Article 163 of the Swiss Federal Constitution establishes a formal framework for legislation enacted by the Federal Assembly, ensuring that each type of legislation is appropriate to its purpose and importance. Federal laws and ordinances are the main legislative instruments used by the Federal Assembly to establish rules of law. Federal laws, as formal legislative acts, generally deal with issues of major importance and require careful consideration and democratic discussion. For example, the Federal Health Insurance Act, which marked a turning point in Swiss health policy, is an example of major legislation adopted in the form of a federal act. On the other hand, ordinances are used for more technical or specific issues, enabling federal laws to be implemented in detail. These ordinances are essential for regulating complex areas such as environmental standards or financial regulations, where specific expertise is required.
In addition to federal laws and ordinances, Article 163 also introduces the category of federal decrees. These decrees may be subject to referendum or, if they are not, they may be classified as simple decrees. Federal decrees subject to referendum are used for important decisions, thereby enabling the Swiss people to participate directly in democracy. Simple federal decrees, on the other hand, are used for less crucial administrative or organisational decisions. This structured and diversified legislative framework enables the Federal Assembly to respond effectively to Switzerland's diverse legislative needs. It reflects the country's commitment to a democratic, transparent and well-organised legislative process, ensuring that laws and regulations are appropriate to the nature and importance of the issues being addressed, while including the participation of the Swiss people in major decisions through the referendum.
Federal decree
Under article 163 of the Federal Constitution of the Swiss Confederation, federal decrees are distinguished from federal laws and ordinances. Federal decrees, although adopted by Parliament, do not always contain rules of law in the substantive sense. This means that they do not necessarily define general, abstract norms governing behaviour or establishing rights and obligations, as laws or ordinances do. Instead, federal decrees may concern specific decisions, administrative measures or directives that do not have the same scope or generality as laws. However, even if they do not contain rules of law in the material sense, federal decrees are considered to be laws in the formal sense because they are enacted by the Federal Assembly. Their adoption follows the formal legislative process and, as such, they have legal authority and must be complied with, although they do not create legal norms in the traditional sense. This distinction between rules of law in the substantive sense and legislative acts in the formal sense is important for understanding how the different categories of legislative acts are used in the Swiss legal system. It reflects the complexity and sophistication of the country's legislative system, where different types of enactment are adapted to different needs and circumstances, while maintaining a coherent and functional structure.
These decrees, although issued by the Federal Assembly, differ from federal laws and ordinances in that they do not contain rules of law in the substantive sense. They are more decision-making in nature and are used in specific and often targeted situations. Federal decrees can be used for a variety of decisions that require specific State intervention. These decisions may affect one or more specific persons, or they may concern specific situations that do not require the establishment of new generalised rules of law. For example, a federal decree could be used to allocate funds for a specific project, to respond to a unique emergency situation, or to ratify a specific international agreement. The decision-making nature of federal decrees illustrates the flexibility and adaptability of the Swiss legislative system. Whereas federal laws and ordinances establish general and abstract standards applicable to everyone, federal decrees enable Parliament to act in a targeted and specific manner. This approach ensures that the Federal Assembly can respond effectively to needs or situations that do not require the creation or modification of generalised rules of law, while maintaining coherent and effective governance.
Decisions refer to individual and concrete measures taken by the competent authorities, based on existing law. These decisions are applied to specific cases, and are distinguished from laws and ordinances by their targeted nature and their direct application to particular situations or individuals. These individual measures are taken in the context of specific cases, which means that they are specifically designed to deal with unique circumstances or problems. They are not intended to establish general standards applicable to everyone, but rather to respond to specific needs or situations that arise. For example, a decision may be an authorisation or permit granted to a company for a specific activity, a decision concerning the legal status of an individual, or a resolution of a particular case under existing laws. This type of decision-making is crucial to ensuring that the legal system can respond flexibly and appropriately to the various situations that arise, providing tailor-made legal solutions that respect the established legal frameworks. This approach also allows for flexibility in the administration of justice and the implementation of policy, ensuring that the decisions taken are relevant and effective for the specific cases to which they apply.
In the Swiss legal framework, decisions taken by the authorities are characterised by their specifically targeted and individualised nature. These decisions are distinguished from laws and ordinances by their direct application to particular cases, reflecting a tailored and precise approach to legislation and administration. The concrete nature of these decisions is illustrated by their orientation towards real and immediate situations. Unlike laws, which establish general standards, these decisions are formulated in response to specific circumstances. For example, in the context of the COVID-19 crisis, the Swiss Federal Council took concrete decisions on containment and economic support measures, each tailored to the specific needs and challenges posed by the pandemic. On the other hand, the individual nature of these decisions is evident in their targeting of specific persons or entities. The effects of these decisions are limited to the parties involved. For example, a decision may concern planning permission for a specific building project or a court ruling in a particular dispute. These decisions apply or interpret existing rules, taking into account the unique details of each case. This decision-making model ensures that the Swiss authorities can respond effectively to individual situations while respecting the established legal framework. It balances the universality of laws with the need to treat each situation according to its particularities. This approach reflects the Swiss tradition of precise and considered governance, ensuring that the decisions taken are both fair and tailored to the cases they concern.
In the Swiss legal system, certain federal decrees are considered to be of such importance that they can be submitted to a referendum, in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Constitution or legislation. This possibility of referendum reflects Switzerland's commitment to direct democracy, allowing citizens to have their say on key government decisions. Federal decrees subject to referendum are generally those that have a significant impact on society or are controversial in nature. The referendum provides a direct opportunity for Swiss citizens to have their say on these decisions, ensuring that important policies reflect the will of the people. This procedure guarantees active citizen participation in the decision-making process and strengthens the democratic legitimacy of policies and laws. For example, issues such as major changes in health policy, changes in tax legislation or decisions concerning national security can be put to a referendum, giving citizens the opportunity to play a direct role in these important decisions. This ability to submit federal decrees to a referendum illustrates the balance between executive power and the right of citizens to participate actively in the governance of their country. It is fundamental to the Swiss political system, reflecting a tradition of direct democracy and citizen participation that is central to Swiss decision-making.
The federal decree in Switzerland is a legislative instrument that enables the adoption of acts that are mainly administrative and specific decisions of the State. This includes decisions that do not require the creation of new rules of law in the general sense, but which are essential for the efficient management and regulation of certain activities or situations. A concrete example of the use of a federal decree is the granting of concessions for nuclear power plants. In this case, the federal decree would be used to grant authorisation and establish the specific conditions under which an entity may build and operate a nuclear power plant. These conditions would include aspects such as safety standards, environmental protection measures and monitoring obligations. The use of a federal decree for such decisions allows for detailed assessment and regulation tailored to the specifics of each case. Federal decrees, in this context, are an important tool for the Swiss government, as they provide the flexibility to manage specific cases while ensuring compliance with general policies and laws. This mechanism allows the Swiss authorities to take administrative and regulatory decisions in a targeted manner, ensuring that specific and often technical issues are dealt with effectively and appropriately. This approach is representative of the Swiss legal and administrative system, where the emphasis is on precision, specificity and efficiency, while maintaining a coherent legal framework and compliance with the general principles of legislation and governance.
Article 53 of the Federal Constitution of the Swiss Confederation plays a fundamental role in preserving the integrity and autonomy of the cantons, which are the cornerstones of the country's federal structure. This constitutional provision provides rigorous protection for the existence, status and territory of the cantons, underlining Switzerland's commitment to balanced federalism. By guaranteeing the existence and status of the cantons and their territory, the Swiss Confederation maintains the stability and respect for regional diversity that characterise the Swiss federal system. This guarantee is essential to preserve cantonal autonomy in a country where local traditions and regional particularities are deeply rooted.
With regard to potential changes to the number or status of the cantons, the Constitution requires dual approval: that of the voters in the cantons concerned and that of the people and the cantons at national level. This requirement reflects the democratic principle that such changes must be approved not only by the populations directly affected, but also by the nation as a whole. A historical example of this procedure was the creation of the canton of Jura in 1979, which was separated from the canton of Bern after a democratic process that included a regional vote as well as national approval. Changes to a canton's territory also follow a rigorous democratic process. Following approval by the voters of the cantons concerned, the Federal Assembly intervenes with a federal decree to make the changes official. These provisions ensure that any territorial changes respect the wishes of the local populations while at the same time complying with national interests. For minor border adjustments between cantons, the procedure is simplified, allowing cantons to conclude mutual agreements for border rectifications. This mechanism provides flexibility for adjustments that may be necessary due to geographical developments or other practical considerations. Article 53 embodies the way in which Switzerland preserves national unity while respecting cantonal autonomy, a balance that lies at the heart of its federal structure. It ensures that changes affecting the cantons are made in a democratic and transparent manner, reflecting Switzerland's respect for its federal and democratic principles.
Switzerland's approach to democratic decision-making, particularly on issues of national importance such as the granting of concessions for nuclear power plants or the purchase of military equipment, illustrates its commitment to involving the people in key government processes. This method of decision-making is in line with Switzerland's tradition of direct democracy, where citizens play an active role in important national affairs. The granting of concessions for nuclear power plants, for example, is a subject with significant environmental, economic and safety implications. In Switzerland, such decisions are not taken solely by government authorities; they may also be submitted to the people for approval, especially if they give rise to significant public concern or debate. This ensures that decisions with a major impact on society are taken with the consent and participation of the people. Similarly, the purchase of military equipment, which involves significant public expenditure and strategic considerations, can also be subject to popular approval. This approach ensures that defence spending and policies reflect the will and preferences of the Swiss people. These decision-making processes, involving referendums or popular votes, are essential to maintaining the confidence and legitimacy of the government. They reflect the belief that citizens should have a say in decisions that significantly affect the nation. By directly involving the people in these important decisions, Switzerland strengthens its democratic system and ensures that the policies adopted are in line with the interests and values of its citizens.
Swiss democracy is characterised by a unique balance between centralised power in Berne and the active participation of the people and the cantons in federal affairs. This model reflects a combination of representative and direct democracy, ensuring that decisions taken at federal level both reflect the will of the people and respect regional autonomy. On the one hand, the people and the cantons delegate part of their power to the Federal Assembly and the Federal Council in Berne, where elected representatives and civil servants take decisions on national issues. This delegation is the essence of representative democracy, where voters entrust their representatives with the responsibility of legislating and governing on their behalf. On the other hand, and in a distinctive way, Switzerland attaches great importance to the direct involvement of the people in federal affairs. This participation takes the form of referendums and popular initiatives, in which citizens have the power to challenge laws passed by parliament or to propose new legislation. This form of direct democracy is a central aspect of Swiss governance, giving citizens direct and regular control over government decisions. Swiss democracy also recognises the importance of cantonal autonomy, where cantons retain significant powers in areas such as education, policing, health and other local affairs. The cantons are not simply administrative entities, but key political players with their own governments and parliaments, reflecting Switzerland's cultural, linguistic and regional diversity. This democratic structure, combining the delegation of power to Berne with the active participation of the people and the cantons, creates a robust and flexible system that is able to respond to the needs and concerns of different parts of Swiss society. It ensures that legislation and policies are not only taken into account by elected representatives, but are also subject to the scrutiny and direct approval of citizens.
Simple federal decrees
Simple federal decrees represent a specific category of legislative acts in the Swiss legal system. Unlike federal decrees subject to referendum, simple federal decrees are not subject to popular approval by referendum. They are generally used for government or administrative decisions which, although important, do not require direct consultation of the people.
A notable example of a simple federal decree is the guarantee of cantonal constitutions. When a Swiss canton revises its constitution, the new constitution must be guaranteed by the Confederation. However, this guarantee, which is granted by the Federal Assembly, does not require a referendum at national level. Its purpose is to ensure that cantonal constitutions comply with the Federal Constitution, while respecting cantonal autonomy.
Another example of the use of simple federal decrees is the adoption of the federal budget. Every year, the Federal Assembly votes on the State budget, detailing the planned expenditure and revenue. Although the budget is a crucial document reflecting political and economic priorities, it is ratified in the form of a simple federal decree, without going to a referendum.
These decrees play a vital role in Swiss governance, enabling Parliament to take essential administrative and financial decisions efficiently. At the same time, the Swiss system maintains a balance between these forms of decision-making and direct democratic participation in matters of a more far-reaching or controversial nature. This distinction between simple federal decrees and those subject to referendum illustrates how Switzerland adapts its legislative process to the nature and importance of different government decisions.
The ordinance
In the Swiss legal system, ordinances play an essential role as rules for the application or enforcement of federal laws. These ordinances, as rules of law, are designed to specify, detail or supplement the provisions contained in federal laws, thus enabling legislation to be implemented effectively and practically.
Ordinances are generally issued by the Federal Council, the executive body of the Swiss government, although some may also be issued by administrative departments or other federal authorities. They have legal force and are binding, which means that they must be complied with in the same way as laws. The main role of ordinances is to provide the technical details and practical guidance needed to apply laws. For example, a federal law may establish a general framework for environmental protection, while an associated ordinance will define specific pollution standards, monitoring procedures and penalties for non-compliance.
This hierarchy between laws and ordinances ensures that the legislative framework is both flexible and appropriate. Laws provide general principles and guidelines, while ordinances deal with more specific and technical aspects, facilitating implementation tailored to practical realities and specific needs. Ordinances are a crucial legislative tool in the Swiss legal system, providing an efficient method of detailing and applying federal laws. They ensure that legislation is not only adopted, but also applied effectively and appropriately, thereby contributing to the orderly functioning and respect for the rule of law in Switzerland.
The ordinance, as a form of legislative act specified in Article 163 of the Swiss Federal Constitution, is of particular importance in the country's legal system. According to this article, the Federal Assembly, which is Switzerland's supreme legislative body, has the power to establish rules of law not only in the form of federal laws, but also in the form of ordinances. In this context, ordinances are essential for the practical implementation of federal laws. They enable the principles and general guidelines set out in federal laws to be translated into specific, detailed and operational instructions. This function is crucial to ensuring that laws are not only theoretically sound, but also effectively applicable in day-to-day reality. For example, a federal law might establish a general framework for the regulation of financial services, while the corresponding ordinances would detail specific requirements for banking licences, financial reporting standards, and compliance criteria. In this way, the ordinances provide a concrete and detailed application of the laws, addressing the technical and practical aspects necessary for their implementation.
The distinction between federal laws and ordinances reflects the methodical and hierarchical structure of the Swiss legislative system. While federal laws lay down the legislative foundations and broad policy guidelines, ordinances focus on the details and methods of implementation, offering the flexibility needed to adapt legislation to specific situations and needs. This approach ensures that the Swiss legislative framework is both robust and adaptable, capable of responding to the complex and changing demands of society and the economy, while ensuring precise and effective governance. Ordinances, as a complement to federal laws, play a crucial role in ensuring that Swiss legislation is not only comprehensive, but also relevant and applicable in practice.
Under Swiss federal law, the power to issue ordinances is divided between a number of state bodies, each with a specific role in implementing and enforcing the law. This division of powers illustrates the complexity and efficiency of the Swiss legal and administrative system. The Federal Assembly, as Switzerland's supreme legislative body, has the power to establish rules that are both substantive and formal. This means that it can create laws and ordinances that not only establish general standards applicable to society as a whole, but also do so according to a formally recognised legislative procedure. For example, the Federal Assembly has passed important laws such as the Health Insurance Act, supplemented by ordinances detailing its implementation. The Federal Council, the executive arm of government, also plays a crucial role in issuing ordinances, particularly for the practical implementation of laws. Federal Council ordinances provide precise guidelines for the application of laws in a variety of areas, from economic regulation to environmental protection. For example, in the context of environmental regulation, the Federal Council has issued ordinances specifying pollution standards and reporting requirements for companies. As for the Federal Supreme Court, although its main role is to interpret the law, it has the power to issue orders concerning procedural and administrative aspects of justice. These orders are essential to ensure the smooth running of the Swiss judicial system, by clarifying procedures and guaranteeing the efficiency of judicial administration. This system, in which various State bodies have the power to issue ordinances, ensures that federal law is implemented in a comprehensive and appropriate manner. It provides the flexibility needed to meet the specific needs and complex challenges of governance, while maintaining order and consistency in the application of the law in Switzerland.
The use of ordinances in the Swiss legal system is closely linked to the non-exhaustive nature of laws and the need to adapt legislation to practical realities. Indeed, the role of ordinances is crucial in filling gaps and specifying details that laws, often formulated in terms of broad principles, cannot cover exhaustively. The Federal Council, as the executive body of the Swiss government, plays a central role in this adaptation process. While the Federal Assembly, as the legislative body, establishes the broad outlines and fundamental principles through legislation, the Federal Council is responsible for drawing up ordinances to ensure that these laws are applied effectively and in accordance with the law. In this way, ordinances make it possible to provide the necessary clarifications and adjust legislation to specific circumstances and needs. For example, in the field of public health, the Federal Assembly may adopt a law establishing the general framework for health cover. The Federal Council then issues ordinances detailing how this law is to be implemented, such as reimbursement procedures, quality standards for healthcare services and eligibility criteria. This division of tasks between the legislature and the executive allows for a more flexible and responsive approach to governance. While the legislator establishes the general guidelines and objectives, the executive, through ordinances, ensures that these objectives are achievable and adapted to the actual conditions and challenges. This complementarity between the legislature and the executive is essential for an efficient and responsive legal and administrative system, capable of responding to the changing needs of society.
In the Swiss legal system, ordinances fall into two main categories, each fulfilling distinct and essential functions. Legislative ordinances, on the one hand, act as extensions or clarifications of formal laws passed by Parliament. Although inferior in rank to these formal laws, they have significant legal force and are binding on citizens. They are drawn up according to a specific procedure by an executive, legislative or judicial authority. A historical example can be found in the ordinances relating to banking regulation, where the Federal Council detailed operational and compliance standards for financial institutions, based on principles established by federal legislation. These legislative ordinances are published in the Official Compendium of Federal Legislation and the Systematic Compendium of Federal Law, thus guaranteeing their accessibility and transparency. Administrative ordinances, on the other hand, focus primarily on the internal organisation and procedures of the public administration. They provide guidance to civil servants and administrative bodies on how to carry out their duties and responsibilities. Unlike legislative orders, they are not published officially but are passed on internally. For example, administrative orders may detail internal procedures for processing permit applications or set out guidelines for assessing asylum claims. These documents play a crucial role in the day-to-day running of the Swiss administration, ensuring that it is managed consistently and in accordance with the policies and laws in force. The presence of these two types of ordinance in the Swiss legal system illustrates the complexity and sophistication of governance in the country. While legislative ordinances extend and clarify the scope of laws for the general public, administrative ordinances facilitate efficient and orderly administration. Together, they enable detailed and appropriate implementation of laws, while ensuring a structured and functional public administration.
Legislation in Switzerland, including ordinances, is strictly governed by respect for fundamental rights, as set out in the Federal Constitution. This means that ordinances, although important instruments for implementing laws, must not under any circumstances impede or violate the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution. The Swiss Constitution establishes a framework of rights and freedoms that protect citizens, such as freedom of expression, the right to privacy, and equality before the law. All legislation, including ordinances issued by the Federal Council or other authorities, must comply with these rights. If an ordinance were to conflict with fundamental rights, it would be considered unconstitutional and therefore invalid. In addition, the Constitution imposes certain limits on what can be regulated by ordinance. This ensures that substantial changes in policy or law, particularly those that might affect fundamental rights or other important aspects of public life, are made through appropriate legislative processes, including, where appropriate, parliamentary approval and referendum. This approach reflects Switzerland's commitment to the rule of law and respect for individual rights. It ensures that, even in the effective administration and enforcement of laws, the protection of fundamental rights remains an absolute priority. So, while ordinances are essential for the day-to-day management and implementation of laws, they must always be balanced with respect for fundamental constitutional principles.
Article 36 of the Swiss Federal Constitution plays a crucial role in maintaining the balance between the fundamental rights of individuals and the requirements of public order and the general welfare. This constitutional provision emphasises that any restrictions on fundamental rights must be carefully justified, legally founded and proportionate. The legal basis for restrictions on fundamental rights is a fundamental principle of the Swiss rule of law. This means that any restrictions on these rights must be explicitly provided for by law. A historical example might be national security laws, which restrict certain rights for reasons of public security, but which must have a clear legal basis in order to be valid. The need to justify any restriction of fundamental rights by a public interest or the protection of the rights of others is also essential. This provision ensures that restrictions do not serve particular interests, but meet legitimate social needs. For example, the restrictions imposed in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, such as confinements or masking requirements, were justified by the protection of public health.
The proportionality rule is another pillar of this provision. It ensures that restrictions are not excessive in relation to the objective pursued. In the Swiss legal framework, this means that restrictive measures must be balanced and must not go beyond what is necessary to achieve their aim. For example, censorship of the media would be considered a disproportionate restriction on freedom of expression, except in very specific and justified circumstances. Finally, the inviolability of the essence of fundamental rights is a key principle. This implies that certain fundamental characteristics of individual rights, such as the right to life or freedom of thought, are absolute and cannot be restricted under any pretext. These principles reflect the way in which Switzerland balances the protection of individual freedoms with social and governmental responsibilities, ensuring that restrictions on fundamental rights are legitimate, necessary and fair. They demonstrate Switzerland's commitment to respect for individual rights while recognising the sometimes unavoidable need for certain limitations for the common good.
The power to issue ordinances in Switzerland is framed in such a way as to respect the Constitution while allowing a degree of flexibility in the administration and implementation of laws. This ability to issue ordinances is essential to the effectiveness of government, but it must be exercised within the limits set by the country's supreme legal framework. The Swiss Constitution, as the fundamental law, determines the general principles and limits of government authority, including the ability to issue ordinances. This power is not restricted by the Constitution, but it must be exercised in accordance with its provisions. In other words, ordinances must not contradict the principles or rights set out in the Constitution. In addition, the Constitution or federal legislation may explicitly authorise the Federal Council to issue ordinances in specific areas. This delegation of power is often used to enable the Federal Council to specify technical details or to apply laws appropriately. For example, a federal law may establish a regulatory framework for environmental protection, and the Constitution or the law may then mandate the Federal Council to develop ordinances that detail specific standards, compliance procedures and penalties for non-compliance. This system ensures that ordinances, while essential for flexible and responsive governance, are issued within a clearly defined legal framework, respecting both the sovereignty of the law and constitutional principles. It also ensures that the legislative process remains transparent and accountable to the Swiss people, in line with the principles of democracy and the rule of law that lie at the heart of the Swiss political system.
The special feature of ordinances in the Swiss legal system is that they are not subject to a referendum. This distinguishes ordinances from federal laws, which can be contested and put to a popular vote. The fundamental reason for this distinction is that ordinances do not create new laws in themselves, but rather serve to implement, clarify or supplement provisions already established by federal legislation. Ordinances are generally drawn up by the Federal Council or other administrative authorities and are designed to provide detailed guidelines for the practical application of laws. For example, if a federal law is passed to regulate a certain industry, a corresponding ordinance could specify technical criteria, compliance procedures, or safety standards that companies must follow. By not subjecting ordinances to a referendum, the Swiss system balances administrative efficiency with democratic participation. While fundamental and significant laws are subject to popular consultation, the more technical and administrative aspects of their implementation can be handled more directly and quickly. This approach ensures that, while respecting the principle of direct democracy for major issues, the administration can operate efficiently and responsively, adapting and applying laws to changing needs and circumstances.
The drafting of enabling legislation for ordinances in Switzerland requires a delicate balance to ensure both legal clarity and respect for democratic principles. A well-drafted enabling act must be clear enough for citizens to understand the scope and limits of the power conferred, yet detailed enough to avoid ambiguity. A historical example of this practice can be seen in Swiss laws relating to the regulation of telecommunications. When the Swiss Parliament passed laws governing this sector, it defined the broad outlines of the policies and objectives, while leaving it to the Federal Council to detail the technical aspects through ordinances. In this context, the legislation was clear enough for citizens to understand the guiding principles, and subsequent ordinances were consistent with these principles while offering the flexibility needed to adapt to rapid technological change.
With regard to compliance with the various layers of law, the ordinances must respect the hierarchy of norms, complying not only with federal law but also with the cantonal constitutions. This is essential in order to maintain legislative coherence and respect Switzerland's federal structure. For example, in the implementation of environmental policies, ordinances must not only adhere to federal directives but also take account of the specific characteristics of the cantons, thus ensuring that they are applied effectively and in a way that respects regional particularities. Transparency and information also play a crucial role in this process. The Swiss government endeavours to communicate openly about enabling legislation and the ordinances it generates, ensuring that citizens are well informed and able to understand the implications of these legislative texts. Parliamentary debates, official publications and the media play an essential role in this communication process. Finally, the possibility of revision and control is a key principle of Swiss governance. By allowing ordinances to be reviewed on a regular basis, the Swiss legal system ensures that these texts remain relevant, appropriate to the legislative objectives and open to public scrutiny and criticism. This approach reflects Switzerland's deep commitment to a legislative process that is democratic, transparent and responsive to the needs and concerns of its citizens.
Ordinances in Swiss law occupy a unique position in the legislative hierarchy. It is considered a rule of law in the substantive sense, but is not a law in the formal sense, which distinguishes it from traditional laws passed by the Federal Assembly. This distinction is based on the nature and procedure of its adoption, as well as on the fact that it is not subject to referendum. As a rule of substantive law, the ordinance establishes concrete standards and directives for the implementation of laws. They play a crucial role in providing the detail and precision required for the practical application of the principles set out in federal laws. However, unlike laws in the formal sense, ordinances are generally issued by the Federal Council or other administrative authorities, not by Parliament. This method of drafting means that they do not go through the same full legislative process as formal laws, particularly as regards parliamentary debate and approval. A crucial aspect of ordinances is that they are not subject to referendum. This means that, although they have the force of law, Swiss citizens do not have the opportunity to challenge them directly by popular vote. This feature is justified by the fact that ordinances serve primarily to clarify and apply laws that have already been passed, rather than to establish new, independent legal principles. As such, they are seen as extensions or applications of existing legislation rather than stand-alone legislative innovations. Ordinances in Switzerland are an essential part of the legal system, providing the flexibility to adapt and apply federal laws in a detailed and contextual manner, while respecting the overall structure and principles of Swiss legislation.