The SHRI has a general mandate to protect and promote human rights in Switzerland. As its resources are very limited, the SHRI has to set targeted priorities in its activities. 

In July 2024, four areas were defined as priorities as part of a strategic process and based on the recommendations of a study commissioned in 2023. These will structure the work of the SHRI until 2027, but without excluding other issues, since the SHRI may become involved in any issues if it regards it as expedient and necessary.  

All four priority topics are cross-cutting issues, so they do not concern a single specific human right, specific convention or specific group of people. On the contrary, they open up space for questions that cut across a variety of areas of human rights.  

Democracy and human rights  

Do human rights place constraints on democracy, does a tension exist between the two? Or are human rights, on the contrary, a pre-requisite for a democracy to be able to function? Or vice versa – is a democratic environment a pre-requisite for the realisation of human rights? Is it possible perhaps for both – tension and interdependence – to apply simultaneously?  

These questions are relevant in all democracies for the validity of human rights and for their support in society. However, they are particularly relevant for Switzerland with its direct democracy, where international protection of human rights in particular is criticised, often with reference to the “will of the people”. In any event, the importance attached to human rights in Switzerland is linked to democratic support in society.  

Possible subtopics in this area include:  

• The relationship between (direct) democracy and international law  

• Popular initiatives and human rights, in particular the invalidation of popular initiatives  

• The role of constitutional jurisdiction in Switzerland and possible alternative mechanisms (ombudsman functions, for example)  

• Inclusion of people with limited or no political rights in Switzerland (people with intellectual disabilities, young people, people without civil rights)  

Federalism and human rights  

The federal government commits to certain human rights standards at the international level. But it is the cantons who are responsible for the police, prisons, hospitals etc. How can international commitments be upheld at the cantonal level? How can international bodies gain an insight of the situation in the cantons? How should cantonal differences in the implementation of human rights be handled? What is the role of the municipalities for the protection and promotion of human rights?  

Federalism is a laboratory for the protection of human rights and can be a good breeding ground for developing best practices. Yet it also poses challenges for the protection of human rights, as it is difficult to implement international standards and recommendations in a federal context – and Switzerland often feels misunderstood by international bodies because of its federalism.  

Possible subtopics in this area include:  

• The role of the cantons in reporting procedures to UN bodies and the Council of Europe, in particular their role in the implementation of recommendations  

• Use of human rights guarantees in cantonal constitutions which go beyond federal and international law and are little used 

• Best practices by cantons that go further than the federal government in the implementation of human rights. One example is the canton of Geneva, with a guarantee of political rights, including for people under general guardianshipⁱ (unter umfassender Beistandschaft) 

• The role of the municipalities in human rights work, e.g. the potential role of the “human rights cities” network 

Outsourcing of the responsibility for human rights  

Historically the State is responsible for the protection of human rights. However, this view assumes that all essential power emanates from the State. But modern power structures are much more complex. The question of assuming responsibility for human rights protection therefore arises in a different light. 

In many contexts, it is no longer the States (but technology companies, for example) that are the powerful actors in society. Furthermore, the sphere of influence of States (and companies) is limited less and less to a specific territory. For example, Switzerland’s asylum policy is shaped on the high seas and at the Schengen Area's external borders; some want to outsource it entirely to Africa. The climate policy of one State also affects the world as a whole, and conflicts are conducted in hybrid form, no longer on the frontline alone. Other human rights violations take place in the virtual arena and to that extent no longer have a geographical location.  

It is therefore crucial for the future effectiveness of human rights to find the answers as to who is responsible for respect for human rights in such diffuse situations.  

Possible subtopics in this area include:  

• Responsibility for value chains  

• Outsourcing of activities relating to human rights (security services, health services, transportation of prisoners, policing, interrogations, data acquisition, care and accommodation etc.) to private service providers  

• Outsourcing of climate policy/ reduction in CO2 emissions in third countries  

• Cross-border control and repression  

Multiple discrimination  

There is a convention for protection against racial discrimination, one for the protection of women, one for the protection of people with disabilities etc. Yet in many cases people suffer discrimination not because of a single characteristic, but on the basis of a combination of characteristics – e.g. on a combination of ethnic origin, gender and the abilities attributed to them.  

It is only possible to understand and combat these forms of discrimination if they are interpreted as multiple discrimination. These forms of discrimination can be particularly offensive for those affected, because they refer simultaneously to multiple components of their identity.  

The SHRI promotes and protects human rights as a whole, and not only those affecting the interests of a specific group. It is therefore in an appropriate role to raise awareness of multiple discrimination and to develop potential improvements.  

Possible subtopics in this area include:  

• Women in migration legislation; e.g. access to legal migration channels and to the possibility of making a request for protection,  

• Poverty and human rights  

• Algorithmic discrimination  

• Sexual orientation in the asylum system