How many negative headlines can you actually formulate? At Credit Suisse, number two in the Swiss financial center, business journalists have recently been able to demonstrate their skills on an almost monthly basis; so numerous were the affairs, revelations and missteps at the big bank in recent years.
When the SZ research on the bank’s questionable customer relationships early on Sunday evening – the Suisse Secrets – became public, some Swiss media noticed that they were tired of scandals. “At the moment, Credit Suisse is not spared anything,” it was said at the business-related New Zurich newspaper almost pitying (the paper did a great job in uncovering affairs at Credit Suisse). at Le Temps from Geneva there was simply talk of a “new scandal”. And the high-coverage commuter newspaper 20 minutes titled with “international media” reporting “about Credit Suisse’s dirty dealings” – as if the report and not the content was the news.
In fact, the actual revelations on Swiss news sites played almost a minor role. On the other hand, hardly any medium forgot to mention why Swiss publications were not involved in the evaluation of the data leak: “No Swiss medium was involved in the research, although some were asked by the consortium,” writes about Le Temps. The reason is Article 47 in the Banking Act, tightened in 2015, which prohibits journalists from evaluating secret bank data “even if it is of public interest”.
The Tamedia editors took the clearest position on this point, with which the Southgerman newspaper – apart from this time – cooperates. “In our country, in the 21st century, a journalist is liable to prosecution if he [verbrecherisches] money. It’s unbearable.” commented 24 hours from western Switzerland. the Tages-Anzeiger writes of a “gag article in the Bank Data Act” that urgently needs to be abolished. “Apparently, when in doubt, it’s still business that counts, not the law. That’s exactly why Switzerland needs journalists who are allowed to do research. It’s a shame that foreign colleagues now have to do it for us.”
The Swiss “Tages-Anzeiger” for limited reporting on the Suisse Secrets.
(Photo: Tages-Anzeiger)
Left and green politicians saw it similarly on Sunday evening. Samira Marti, member of the National Council for the Social Democrats (SP), tweeted: “#SuisseSecrets shows: Censorship article prohibits Swiss media from uncovering tax crimes. That has to change.” Her party will submit a corresponding proposal in the parliamentary session beginning on February 28. SP party president Cédric Wermuth referred to another push by his party, which aims to strengthen sanctions instruments for the Swiss financial market supervisory authority. “The uncovering of #SuisseSecrets shows that Switzerland needs banking supervision worthy of the name. Today’s fines do not impress any bank,” Wermuth tweeted.
The political forces that had driven the tightening of the banking law were also a topic on Twitter on Sunday evening. “Thanks to the @FDP_Liberals and their servitude to the banks and their criminal clients, freedom of the press in Switzerland has been restricted,” tweeted an SP politician. Former Green Party President Regula Rytz asked: “Could someone please ask which parties accept donations from @CreditSuisse? And how much? I have refrained from doing so several times during my time as party president.” In fact, the issue of party financing and vested interests of members of parliament in Switzerland is a delicate one. The country has only had a law since the summer of 2021 that obliges parties to disclose large donations and financial aid for campaigns.
In contrast to representatives of left-wing parties, liberal, conservative and right-wing politicians commented remarkably little on the revelations. Andrea Caroni, the FDP politician who said the memorable sentence “It is not part of the job of journalists to spread secret, intimate, personal data that was stolen in the media” in the 2014 bank law debate, stayed on Sunday evening mute.
On the other hand, several non-governmental organizations dealing with transparency and freedom of the press found clear words. Reporters Without Borders Switzerland tweeted: “Article 47 of the Swiss Banking Act is an intolerable threat to freedom of information.” The Swiss government and parliament cannot remain inactive, the law must be corrected.
“Switzerland simply does not respect European legal norms on freedom of expression and freedom of the press,” said Ricardo Gutiérrez, Secretary General of the European Federation of Journalists. in a statement quote. The country puts the specific interests of bankers ahead of general interests. That is reminiscent of authoritarian states.
Banks cannot be trusted to monitor themselves, criticizes Transparency International
Transparency International means Credit Suisse in an opinion as a “professional enabler of financial crimes” and calls on governments around the world to take firm action against such behavior. “The Suisse Secrets investigation shows once again that banks cannot be trusted to police themselves. The public is tired of hearing how banks are helping corrupt officials around the world launder their money – and how they are doing it do better next time,” said Maíra Martini, the organization’s money laundering expert.
In his reaction to the revelations, the US economist and Nobel Prize winner Joseph Stiglitz was surprised by the density of problematic customers in the leaked data. “What would we see if the window into the bank had been bigger?” asks Stiglitz. He also emphasizes the still effective Swiss banking secrecy: “The Suisse Secrets confirm what experts have been warning about for a long time: Switzerland has agreed to the automatic exchange of information primarily with other industrialized countries, but not with poorer countries.” Kleptocracy and corruption could continue to thrive there, Stiglitz warns.