Switzerland

The Constitution of Switzerland and other laws and policies both protect and respect religious freedom in practice. However, some discrimination based on religious identity, belief, or practice have been reported.

According to national statistics, almost 37% of Swiss nationals are Roman Catholic; the Reformed Evangelical community makes up a further 24.4%. 25% report no religious affiliation. Muslim and Jewish communities account for approximately 5.5% of the population and have faced discrimination.[ref]https://www.eda.admin.ch/aboutswitzerland/en/home/gesellschaft/religionen/religionen—fakten-und-zahlen.html[/ref]

Constitution and government Education and children’s rights Family, community, society, religious courts and tribunals Freedom of expression advocacy of humanist values
There is a religious tax or tithing which is compulsory, or which is state-administered and discriminates by precluding non-religious groups
State-funding of religious institutions or salaries, or discriminatory tax exemptions
There is state funding of at least some religious schools
Religious or ideological instruction is mandatory in at least some public schools (without secular or humanist alternatives)
Religious groups control some public or social services
Blasphemy or criticism of religion is restricted in law and is punishable by a fine
Anomalous discrimination by local or provincial authorities, or overseas territories
Constitution and government
There is a religious tax or tithing which is compulsory, or which is state-administered and discriminates by precluding non-religious groups
State-funding of religious institutions or salaries, or discriminatory tax exemptions
Anomalous discrimination by local or provincial authorities, or overseas territories
Education and children’s rights
There is state funding of at least some religious schools
Religious or ideological instruction is mandatory in at least some public schools (without secular or humanist alternatives)
Family, community, society, religious courts and tribunals
Religious groups control some public or social services
Freedom of expression advocacy of humanist values
Blasphemy or criticism of religion is restricted in law and is punishable by a fine
Use of Conscientious Objection clauses resulting in the denial of lawful services to women and LGBTI+ people
Religious or ideological instruction is mandatory in all or most state-funded schools with no secular or humanist alternative
Insufficient information or detail not included in this report
Insufficient information or detail not included in this report
The state is secular, with separation of religious and political authorities, not discriminating against any religion or belief
Insufficient information or detail not included in this report
Insufficient information or detail not included in this report
image_pdfDownload this country entry as a PDF

Countries: no countries relate to this boundary condition

No condition holds in this strand
No condition holds in this strand
No condition holds in this strand
Religious courts or tribunals rule directly on some family or ‘moral’ matters; it is legally an opt-in system, but the possibility of social coercion is very clear
No condition holds in this strand
image_pdfDownload this country entry as a PDF

Countries: no countries relate to this boundary condition

Localised or infrequent but recurring and widespread social marginalisation or prejudice against the non-religious
image_pdfDownload this country entry as a PDF

This condition is unusual in that it is applied in cases where there is some social discrimination, but it is not pervasive or nationwide. This condition is applied when there is sufficient background evidence to warrant the assertion that discrimination is not anomalous but widespread, and this condition may be applied for example even where if there is no legislative discrimination or where the non-religious may have legal recourse against such discrimination. However, societal discrimination (i.e. discrimination by peers, as opposed to state or legal discrimination) is not easily measured, and for this reason the Report does not currently have similar more severe boundary conditions to capture higher levels of social discrimination per se. In principle these may be introduced in future. However, we consider that countries with actual higher levels of social discrimination against the non-religious will generally already meet other higher level (more severe) boundary conditions under this thematic strand.

Countries: Botswana, Greece, Serbia, United States of America

The dominant influence of religion in public life undermines the right to equality and/or non-discrimination
image_pdfDownload this country entry as a PDF

Applied when the influence of religion on public life undermines others’ rights, such as SRHR, women’s rights, LGBTI+ rights.

May be applied when the influence is overt (i.e. when religious laws are applied to undermine others’ rights) or covert (i.e. where religious pressure groups exert influence to affect policy)

Countries: Andorra, Antigua and Barbuda, Armenia, Bahamas, Belize, Bolivia, Brunei Darussalam, Congo, Democratic Republic of, Croatia, Cuba, Dominica, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Eswatini, Fiji, Gambia, Ghana, Guatemala, Guinea, Hungary, Iran, Italy, Jamaica, Jordan, Liberia, Lithuania, Mexico, Moldova, Montenegro, Mozambique, Nicaragua, North Macedonia, Oman, Paraguay, Qatar, Romania, Russia, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Slovakia, Solomon Islands, Sri Lanka, Suriname, Timor-Leste (East Timor), Trinidad and Tobago, Ukraine, Zambia

The non-religious are persecuted socially or there are prohibitive social taboos against atheism, humanism or secularism
Complete tyranny precludes all freedoms of expression and thought, religion or belief
image_pdfDownload this country entry as a PDF

Applied when overriding acts of oppression by the State are extreme, to the extent that the question of freedom of thought and expression is almost redundant, because all human rights and freedoms are quashed by authorities.

Countries: North Korea

Expression of core Humanist principles on democracy, freedom and human rights is brutally repressed
Expression of non-religious views is severely persecuted, or is rendered almost impossible by severe social stigma, or is highly likely to be met with hatred or violence
There is significant social marginalisation of the non-religious or stigma associated with expressing atheism, humanism or secularism
Religious or ideological indoctrination is utterly pervasive in schools
There is a nominal state church with few privileges or progress is being made toward disestablishment
The non-religious are barred from some government offices (including posts reserved for particular religions or sects)
‘Apostasy’ is outlawed and punishable with a prison sentence
‘Apostasy’ or conversion from a specific religion is outlawed and punishable by death
Some religious courts rule in civil or family matters on a coercive or discriminatory basis
Religious authorities have supreme authority over the state
Preferential treatment is given to a religion or religion in general
image_pdfDownload this country entry as a PDF

This condition is applied where there are miscellaneous indicators that organs of the state offer various forms of support for a religion, or to religion in general over non-religious worldviews, suggesting a preference for those beliefs, or that the organs of that religion are privileged.

Countries: Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Belize, Bhutan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Burundi, Canada, Cape Verde, Chile, Colombia, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Finland, Germany, Ghana, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Liberia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Montenegro, Mozambique, Nepal, New Zealand, Nigeria, North Macedonia, Oman, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Qatar, Romania, Rwanda, San Marino, Serbia, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Solomon Islands, Sri Lanka, Tajikistan, Tanzania, Timor-Leste (East Timor), Tunisia, Turkey, Tuvalu, United Kingdom, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Zimbabwe

There is a pattern of impunity or collusion in violence by non-state actors against the nonreligious
State-funded schools provide religious education which may be nominally comprehensive but is substantively biased or borderline confessional
Religious or ideological instruction in a significant number of schools is of a coercive fundamentalist or extremist variety
image_pdfDownload this country entry as a PDF

This condition highlights countries where schools subject children to fundamentalist religious instruction with no real opportunity to question fundamentalist tenets, or where lessons routinely encourage hatred (for example religious or ethnic hatred). The wording “significant number of schools” is not given a rigid quantification (sometimes the worst-offending schools are unregistered, illegal, or otherwise uncounted); however the condition is not applied in cases where only a small number of schools meet the description and may be anomalous, as opposed to being indicative of a widespread problem.

Countries: Bangladesh, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia

State legislation is largely or entirely derived from religious law or by religious authorities
Religious or ideological instruction is mandatory in at least some public schools (without secular or humanist alternatives)
‘Blasphemy’ or criticism of religion is outlawed and punishable by death
Government figures or state agencies openly marginalize, harass, or incite hatred or violence against the non-religious
It is illegal to advocate secularism or church-state separation, or such advocacy is suppressed
Quasi-divine veneration of a ruling elite is enforced, or a single-party regime holds uncontested power, subject to severe punishment
Legal or constitutional provisions exclude non-religious views from freedom of belief
It is illegal to register an explicitly Humanist, atheist, secularist or other non-religious NGO or other human rights organization, or such groups are persecuted by authorities
There is a religious tax or tithing which is compulsory, or which is state-administered and discriminates by precluding non-religious groups
The non-religious are barred from holding government office
Some concerns about children's right to specifically religious freedom
image_pdfDownload this country entry as a PDF

This condition may apply if specifically religious education, religious materials, or specific religious denominations are so tightly controlled that children are in fact over-protected from exposure to religion and are likely unable to explore or construct their own worldview in accordance with their evolving capacities. This condition helps us to classify states (perhaps with secular constitutions) which have criminalized specifically religious beliefs or practices. This condition is not applied if the restricted beliefs or practices are found to be outlawed due to their being of an extremist variety. While this condition does not directly reflect discrimination against non-religious persons or non-religious ideas, it does represent an overall threat to freedom of thought, conscience, religion or belief; such restrictions could spill over to affect non-religious beliefs later; and they pose a risk of backlash against over-zealous secular authorities or even against non-religious individuals by association.

Countries: China, Congo, Democratic Republic of, Cuba, Equatorial Guinea, Ethiopia, Guinea, Guyana, Italy, Kazakhstan, Laos, Madagascar, Mexico, North Macedonia, Romania, Serbia, Tajikistan, Togo, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Zimbabwe

It is illegal or unrecognised to identify as an atheist or as non-religious
It is made difficult to register or operate an explicitly Humanist, atheist, secularist or other non-religious NGO or other human rights organization
Legend
 
Systemic Discrimination
Mostly Satisfactory
More information about rating table

Constitution and government

Article 15 of the Constitution[ref]https://www.admin.ch/opc/en/classified-compilation/19995395/index.html[/ref] protects freedom of religion or belief, stating: “Every person has the right to choose freely their religion or their philosophical convictions, and to profess them alone or in community with others”, however, the preamble to the Constitution begins with an invocation “In the name of Almighty God!”.

Under Article 72 of the Constitution:

  1. The regulation of the relationship between the church and the state is the responsibility of the Cantons.
  2. The Confederation and the Cantons may within the scope of their powers take measures to preserve public peace between the members of different religious communities.
  3. The construction of minarets is prohibited.

Article 73(3) was adopted following a popular vote in 2009. The prohibition does not apply to the four existing mosques with minarets established before the constitution was amended to include the ban. The law allows the construction of new mosques without minarets.

While the rights to freedom of religion or belief, freedom of expression, and freedom of assembly and association are generally respected in practice, some individual cantons still pursue discriminatory policies based on the locally dominant religion (Protestant or Catholic).

Except for the cantons of Geneva and Neuchâtel, all Swiss cantons have state-recognised religions including the two main Christian churches.[ref]https://www.eda.admin.ch/aboutswitzerland/en/home/gesellschaft/religionen/religionen—fakten-und-zahlen.html[/ref]

Switzerland has a long established relationship with the Vatican, where the Swiss Guards have protected the Pope and his palace for over 500 years.

Church taxes

In most of the 26 cantons (with the exception of Geneva and Neuchatel, where church and state are separate) at least two of the three traditional religious communities—Roman Catholic, Old Catholic, or Protestant levy a church tax in general collected by the state.[ref]https://taxsummaries.pwc.com/switzerland/individual/other-taxes; https://www.state.gov/reports/2019-report-on-international-religious-freedom/switzerland/[/ref] Each canton observes its own regulations regarding the relationship between church and state. In some cantons the church tax is voluntary, while in others an individual who chooses not to contribute to the church tax may have to leave the church formally. In 20 cantons private companies are unable to avoid payment of the church tax. Some cantons also allow the church tax to be collected on behalf of the Jewish community. In most cantons legally recognized churches are privileged with a general tax exemption and receive subsidies paid from general taxation. In the canton of Berne, the clergy is on the state payroll. Islamic and other non-traditional religious and atheist groups are excluded from this system.

Education and children’s rights

Most public schools provide religious education in some form. This specific form of religious education depends on the predominant creed in each particular canton. Religious education classes are mandatory in some cantons, but not in others. However, waivers are regularly given upon applying for one. Children from minority religious groups may attend classes of their own faith. Practices vary from canton to canton, but most often these classes are held outside of school premises and school hours and financed by the minority religious groups. Parents may also send their children to private religious schools at their expense or home-school their children.[ref]https://www.state.gov/reports/2019-report-on-international-religious-freedom/switzerland/[/ref]

The cantons of Basel, Zurich, and Vaud also offer religious communities legal recognition as private entities. This gives them the right to teach their religions in public schools.[ref]https://www.state.gov/reports/2019-report-on-international-religious-freedom/switzerland/[/ref]

In 2012 the canton of Zürich introduced a new compulsory primary and secondary school subject “Religion and Culture”. Non-religious worldviews are largely ignored and modern-day atheism is portrayed uniquely in connection with former Communist states.

Family, community and society

Social discrimination and hatred

The Swiss federal penal code proscribes any type of deprivation of or discrimination against any religion or religious believers.

Anybody who incites racial hatred or discrimination risks being imprisoned for up to 3 years, under Article 261bis of the Swiss Criminal Code (SCC).[ref]https://www.admin.ch/opc/en/classified-compilation/19370083/202007010000/311.0.pdf[/ref] This includes “any person who publicly denigrates or discriminates against another or a group of persons on the grounds of their race, ethnic origin or religion or sexual orientation in a manner that violates human dignity, whether verbally, in writing or with images, by using gestures, through acts of aggression or by other means, or any person who on any of these grounds denies, trivialises or seeks justification for genocide or other crimes against humanity”; as such the law appears only to criminalize genuine incitement to hatred and violence and it does not constitute a law against mere “insult”, “offence”, or “blasphemy”.[ref]cybercrime.admin.ch/[/ref]

However, there have been reports of societal discrimination based on religious identity, belief, or practice. Members of Muslim and Jewish religious minority groups were usually the victims of such incidents.[ref]https://www.state.gov/reports/2019-report-on-international-religious-freedom/switzerland/[/ref]

Despite the government legally protecting and generally respecting the rights of cultural, religious, and linguistic minorities – especially those of African and Central European descent, as well as Roma – they face increasing societal discrimination. A growing anxiety in the country about the burgeoning number growing foreign-born population has resulted in the passage of stricter asylum laws.

Freedom of expression, advocacy of humanist values

Freedom of speech is guaranteed by the Swiss Constitution and the country has free media environment. However, the state-owned Swiss Broadcasting Corporation dominates the broadcast market. The merging of newspaper ownership in large media cartels has forced the closure of some small and local newspapers. The law fines public incitement to racial hatred or discrimination and denying crimes against humanity. There is no government constraint on access to the internet.[ref]freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world[/ref]

De facto “Blasphemy” law

Article 261bis of the Swiss Criminal Code criminalizes: “Any person who publicly and maliciously insults or mocks the religious convictions of others, and in particularly their belief in God, or
maliciously desecrates objects of religious veneration, any person who maliciously prevents, disrupts or publicly mocks an act of worship, the conduct of which is guaranteed by the Constitution, or any person who maliciously desecrates a place or object that is intended for a religious ceremony or an act of worship the conduct of which is guaranteed by the Constitution,
is liable to a monetary penalty.”

A “daily penalty unit” amounts to a minimum penalty of 30 CHF and a maximum penalty of 3000 CHF. The court exercises its discretion to decide the amount of the daily penalty units based on the offender’s financial situation.[ref]https://www.admin.ch/opc/en/classified-compilation/19370083/index.html[/ref]

Article 261 does not criminalize blasphemy per se, as it outlaws insulting and mocking “the religious convictions of others, and in particularly [sic] their belief in God”. Nevertheless, Article 261 is still problematic because it specifically protects religious beliefs from criticism and constitutes an unnecessary restriction to the right to freedom of expression, enshrined in Article 16 in the Constitution. Article 261bis of the Criminal Code sufficiently limits freedom of expression to the necessary extent, as it prohibits the discrimination and incitement to hatred against a person because of their race, ethnic origin, religion or sexual orientation, making article 261 redundant.