Keyword ‣ law
12 references

On November 29, 2023, the Federal Council opened the consultation procedure relating to the partial revision of the law on epidemics. Little debated, the project nevertheless introduces fundamental changes by passing the exceptional measures of the Covid law into ordinary law. With vaccination certificates, screening, tracing and other controversial interventions, the law confirms the shift from disease surveillance to surveillance of people.

It also transfers authority to the WHO within the framework of the “treaty” on pandemics and amendments to the International Health Regulations, the texts of which will only be communicated on the eve of the vote at the next World Assembly of health, May 27, 2024. “Global health” mentioned in the law would discreetly supplant national policies and constitutional rights, which guarantee the freedom of choice of patients and the plurality of therapeutic approaches. This is why many citizens are sounding the alarm, inviting the population and the parties concerned to react before it is too late.
New attacks on freedoms

The new version of the law on epidemics seems to cement into law the measures taken during the Covid crisis, without worrying about the rights and freedoms enshrined in the Constitution. The text lists a series of potential threats to public health to which only a heavy regime of centralization, digitalization, surveillance, and obligations seems to be able to respond.

Several provisions go further than the constraints imposed during the Covid period. For example, we see vaccination obligations discreetly emerging, even though they constitute a violation of physical integrity, a fundamental right nevertheless considered inviolable in Switzerland.

Another strengthening of measures concerns the freedom to assemble (article 22 of the Constitution). Article 40 of the new law now intends to regulate in a more systematic and restricted manner the collection of people's contact details, work from home activities or demonstrations in public spaces.
Return of the health certificate

Without too much surprise, the health certificate is making a comeback, despite the opposition of almost half of the Swiss to its use and the population's rejection of digital identity. The law gives the Federal Council the possibility of defining a document for entering and leaving another country, and it can of course be linked to corresponding foreign systems. In addition, it intends to add other health data that doctors, hospitals and public and private health institutions would be obliged to declare.

We are thus moving from the current logic of reporting illnesses to an obligation to declare people. Article 12 provides for the declaration of “information enabling the identification of people who are sick, presumed sick, infected, presumed infected or excreting pathogenic agents” (lit. a), as well as “in particular socio-demographic and behavioral data , including data on the intimate sphere” (lit. c).

For Dr Philippe Vallat, independent public health expert, this is a real paradigm shift:

“We will no longer be considered sick because we feel that way, or because a doctor has determined so, but administratively by default. This would establish a new medical paradigm based on generalized suspicion, with everyone being a priori “presumed” to be sick or infected. This would lead to the need to prove that one is not contagious, and therefore not dangerous to others. How ? The project says nothing about it, but the Covid experience of the certificate showed how an administrative system based on scientifically inadequate measures opened the door to arbitrariness and discrimination.

In his proposed motion on the bill, journalist Guy Mettan also believes that it is more of a control measure than a health intervention:

“Article 49b provides for the maintenance of the health certificate, originally established as a means of avoiding the spread of the virus, while the reality of the Covid crisis has shown that it is an administrative document inoperative in public health, vaccination does not prevent transmission.

The digital identity handed over to the profession by the CF, the health certificate introduced in the draft revision of the law on epidemics and the electronic patient file contribute to the abolition of the private sphere and the establishment of a globalized control of our lives.

The example of Belgium confirms these hypotheses: local authorities and the federal government voted to return the health certificate on February 8. They authorized the handing over of its verification keys to WHO and extended the validity of old documents with retroactive effect. Officially, the health certificate (Covid Safety Ticket) has been operational again since July 1, 2023, the date on which the European Union transferred its system to the WHO with a view to creating a global digital certificate.

The certificate will soon be included in the European digital wallet which will contain other health data and will be linked to the European digital identity and biometric data. Other administrative documents should be added, for example insurance, driving license, and very probably banking data.
Transfers of powers

Although the principles of autonomy are reaffirmed in the texts, in practice we are witnessing a centralization of powers around health. Thus, the law on epidemics defines 32 “delegated powers” ​​to the federal government, which will reduce the power of the cantons to an empty shell, while continuing to pay half of the bill.

But above all, it is the attack on national sovereignty that is worrying. There is a clause in the law triggering “the particular situation in Switzerland” by the WHO (art. 6b). And, according to the amended article 12 of the IHR, the Director General of the WHO, after consulting an emergency committee, would have the power to announce alone and without possibility of contestation the potential or actual appearance of a public health emergency of international concern (PHEIC), including a pandemic, and to declare its end.

Furthermore, the law seems to incorporate content from the WHO CA+ Pandemic Treaty and the revision of the international health regulations, although these will only be known at the end of the current negotiations.

For critics of the law, the will of the WHO is clear: with the modification of articles 1, 13a, 42, 53a, 54bis of the IHR, all the recommendations of the WHO (e.g.: compulsory certificates, quarantine , vaccination certificates or the constitution of stocks of medicines) would become binding on the signatory States.

The WHO would also expand its field of competence, in particular with catch-all concepts such as “One Health”, the notion of “one health” thanks to which it could also deal with the climate, animals, agriculture , education or transport to name just a few areas concerned.

It’s the same with the notion of “infodemics” and its strategy of “fighting disinformation”. The organization seems to want to transform itself into a “ministry of scientific truth”, with its censorship and propaganda campaigns. It intends to force States to combat sources of “disinformation” and their authors in the various media and on social networks.

read the article