Соответствующая норма
Switzerland
Practice Relating to Rule 161. International Cooperation in Criminal Proceedings
Switzerland’s Federal Act on International Mutual Assistance (1981), as amended to 2010, states in its general provisions:
1. Unless other federal acts or international agreements provide otherwise, this Act shall govern all procedures of international cooperation in criminal matters, and in particular:
b. assistance aimed at supporting criminal proceedings abroad (Part Three);
c. the transfer of proceedings and punishment of offences (Part Four);
d. the execution of foreign criminal judgments (Part Five).
3. This Act applies only to criminal matters in which recourse to the courts is permitted under the law of the requesting State.
4. This Act confers no right to international cooperation in criminal matters. 
Switzerland, Federal Act on International Mutual Assistance, 1981, as amended to 2010, Article 1(1) and (3)–(4).
[footnotes in original omitted]
The Act further states:
Art. 2 Foreign proceedings
A request for cooperation in criminal matters shall not be granted if there are reasons to believe that the foreign proceedings
a. do not meet the procedural requirements of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 4 November 1950, or the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 16 December 1966;
b. are being conducted so as to prosecute or punish a person on account of his or her political opinions, his or her belonging to a certain social group, his or her race, religion, or nationality;
c. could result in aggravating the situation of the defendant for any of the reasons mentioned under letter b; or
d. have other serious defects.
Art. 3 Nature of the offence
1. A request shall not be granted if the subject of the proceedings is an act which, in the Swiss view, is of a predominantly political nature, constitutes a violation of the obligation to perform military or similar service, or appears to be directed against the national security or military defence of the requesting State.
2. The plea that an act is of a political nature shall not be taken into account under any circumstances:
a. in cases of genocide;
b. in cases of crimes against humanity;
c. in cases of war crimes; or
d. if the act appears particularly reprehensible because the offender, for the purpose of extortion or duress, has endangered or threatened to endanger the life or limb of persons, especially by hijacking aircraft, using means of mass extermination, causing a catastrophe or taking hostages. 
Switzerland, Federal Act on International Mutual Assistance, 1981, as amended to 2010, Articles 2 and 3.
[footnotes in original omitted]
Switzerland’s Criminal Procedure Code (2007), as amended to 2012, which regulates the prosecution and adjudication by the federal and cantonal criminal justice authorities of offences under federal law, including war crimes, states:
Art. 54 Scope of Application of this Code
1. The provision of international mutual assistance and the mutual assistance proceedings are governed by this Code only to the extent that other federal acts and international agreements make no provision therefor. 
Switzerland, Criminal Procedure Code, 2007, as amended to 2012, Article 54(1).
In 2008, in its sixth periodic report to the Committee against Torture, Switzerland stated in the section on universal jurisdiction:
The military justice system has had occasion, on the basis of article 3 (1), sect. 9, and articles 108 to 114 of the Military Criminal Code, to prosecute and try alleged war criminals (violation of the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949). During the reporting period, the military courts handled 25 such cases. … Of the two cases concerning Sierra Leone, one … was the subject of reciprocal judicial assistance. 
Switzerland, Sixth periodic report to the Committee against Torture, 18 March 2009, UN Doc. CAT/C/CHE/6, submitted 2 July 2008, § 110.
Switzerland’s Federal Act on International Mutual Assistance (1981), as amended to 2010, states in its general provisions:
Unless other federal acts or international agreements provide otherwise, this Act shall govern all procedures of international cooperation in criminal matters, and in particular:
a. the extradition of persons who are the subject of criminal prosecution or have been convicted. 
Switzerland, Federal Act on International Mutual Assistance, 1981, as amended to 2010, Article 1(1)(a).
In the section on extradition, the Act further states:
Foreign nationals may be surrendered to another State for prosecution or enforcement of a sentence involving deprivation of liberty for acts which come under its criminal jurisdiction if that State requests extradition or if it accepts the Swiss request to prosecute the offence or enforce the judgment. 
Switzerland, Federal Act on International Mutual Assistance, 1981, as amended to 2010, Article 32.
The Act also states:
1. Extradition is permitted if, according to the documents supporting the request, the offence:
a. is punishable by deprivation of liberty for a maximum period of at least one year or a more severe sentence both under the law of Switzerland and under the law of the requesting State and
b. is not subject to Swiss jurisdiction.
2. In determining whether an act is an offence under Swiss law, the following are not considered:
a. its specific degrees of guilt and conditions for criminal liability;
b. the conditions relating to the personal and time-related application of the Swiss Criminal Code and the Swiss Military Criminal Code of 13 June 1927 with regard to the criminal provisions on genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. 
Switzerland, Federal Act on International Mutual Assistance, 1981, as amended to 2010, Article 35(1) and (2).
[footnotes in original omitted]
The Act further states:
2. Extradition shall be denied if the request is based on a verdict issued in the absence of the defendant and if the minimum rights of the defence to which a defendant is recognised to be entitled were not respected in the proceedings preceding the verdict; this rule does not apply if the requesting State gives sufficient assurances to guarantee the defendant the right to new court proceedings where the rights of the defence are respected.
3. Extradition shall also be denied if the requesting State fails to guarantee that the defendant will not be sentenced to death, that an already pronounced death penalty will not be carried out, or that he will not be subjected to treatment that will impair his physical integrity. 
Switzerland, Federal Act on International Mutual Assistance, 1981, as amended to 2010, Article 37(2) and (3).
[footnotes in original omitted]
Switzerland’s Military Criminal Code (1927), taking into account amendments entered into force up to 2011, which also contains a chapter on war crimes, states in the part on general provisions:
Art. 10
1 If the personal conditions are fulfilled, the present code is applicable both to offences committed in Switzerland and to those committed abroad.
1bis The present code applies to persons mentioned in art. 5 [paragraph 1], number 1, letter d and number 5, who have committed abroad one of the acts under … chapter 6bis [war crimes] of Part 2 or art. 114a [punishability of superiors] if they are present in Switzerland, unless they are extradited or transferred to an international criminal court whose jurisdiction is recognized by Switzerland.
1ter Where the victim of the act carried out abroad is not Swiss and the perpetrator is not Swiss, the prosecution, with the exception of measures to secure evidence, may be abandoned or may be dispensed with in the following cases:
a. a foreign authority or an international criminal court whose jurisdiction is recognized by Switzerland is prosecuting the offence and the suspected perpetrator is extradited or delivered to the court;
b. the suspected perpetrator is no longer in Switzerland and is not expected to return there;
c. the necessary evidence cannot be obtained.
1quater The present code applies to persons who have committed abroad, against a Swiss military person, one of the acts under … chapter 6bis [war crimes] of Part 2 or art. 114a [punishability of superiors], if they are present in Switzerland or have been extradited there because of this act, unless they are extradited or transferred to an international criminal court whose jurisdiction is recognized by Switzerland. 
Switzerland, Military Criminal Code, 1927, taking into account amendments entered into force up to 2011, Article 10(1)–(1quater). The German language version of Article 10(1ter)(b) notes: “the suspected perpetrator is no longer in Switzerland and is not expected to return there; or”.
[footnotes in original omitted]
Switzerland’s Penal Code (1937), taking into account amendments entered into force up to 2011, states in in the common provisions under the titles on genocide and crimes against humanity and on war crimes:
Art. 264m
1 A person who carries out an act under Title 12bis and 12ter [on war crimes] or Art. 264k [on the criminal liability of superiors] while abroad is guilty of an offence if he is in Switzerland and is not extradited to another State or delivered to an international criminal court whose jurisdiction is recognised by Switzerland.
2 Where the victim of the act carried out abroad is not Swiss and the perpetrator is not Swiss, the prosecution, with the exception of measures to secure evidence, may be abandoned or may be dispensed with in the following cases:
a. a foreign authority or an international criminal court whose jurisdiction is recognised by Switzerland is prosecuting the offence and the suspected perpetrator is extradited or delivered to the court;
b. the suspected perpetrator is no longer in Switzerland and is not expected to return there. 
Switzerland, Penal Code, 1937, taking into account amendments entered into force up to 2011, Article 264m (1)–(2). The German, Italian and Romansh language versions of Article 264m (2)(a) note: “a foreign authority or an international criminal court whose jurisdiction is recognized by Switzerland is prosecuting the offence and the suspected perpetrator is extradited or delivered to the court; or”.
Switzerland’s ABC of International Humanitarian Law (2009) states:
Introduction
Although international humanitarian law is intended mainly for States and parties to a conflict (e.g. armed groups), many of its provisions must also be respected by individuals. States are obliged to respect the norms, to suppress any violations, and either themselves prosecute persons responsible for grave breaches, in particular of war crimes, or extradite such persons. …
Implementation
… Furthermore, governments must take all necessary measures to suppress violations. In the case of grave breaches, the States must themselves prosecute the perpetrators, or hand them over to another contracting party for prosecution. …
War crimes
War crimes are grave breaches of the provisions of the Geneva Conventions of 1949 protecting persons and objects as well as other serious violations of the laws and customs that apply to an international or non-international Armed conflict. … States are under an obligation to prosecute or extradite persons suspected of having committed war crimes on their territory. 
Switzerland, Federal Department of Foreign Affairs, ABC of International Humanitarian Law, 2009, pp. 4, 24 and 40.
Switzerland’s Federal Act on International Mutual Assistance (1981), as amended to 2010, states:
1. No Swiss national may, without his written consent, be extradited or surrendered to a foreign State for prosecution or for the execution of a sentence. Consent may be withdrawn up to the time when the surrender is ordered.
2. Paragraph 1 does not apply to transit or return of a Swiss national who is temporarily surrendered by a third State to the Swiss authorities. 
Switzerland, Federal Act on International Mutual Assistance, 1981, as amended to 2010, Article 7.
Switzerland’s Federal Act on International Mutual Assistance (1981), as amended to 2010, states:
1. A request [for criminal cooperation including the extradition of persons who are the subject of criminal prosecution or have been convicted] shall not be granted if the subject of the proceedings is an act which, in the Swiss view, is of a predominantly political nature, constitutes a violation of the obligation to perform military or similar service, or appears to be directed against the national security or military defence of the requesting State.
2. The plea that an act is of a political nature shall not be taken into account under any circumstances:
a. in cases of genocide;
b. in cases of crimes against humanity;
c. in cases of war crimes; or
d. if the act appears particularly reprehensible because the offender, for the purpose of extortion or duress, has endangered or threatened to endanger the life or limb of persons, especially by hijacking aircraft, using means of mass extermination, causing a catastrophe or taking hostages. 
Switzerland, Federal Act on International Mutual Assistance, 1981, as amended to 2010, Article 3(1)–(2).
[footnotes in original omitted]
Switzerland’s Decree on Cooperation with the International Tribunals Act (1995) states:
This Decree governs:
a. cooperation with the International Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of the Former Yugoslavia since 1991, established by resolution 827 (1993) of the United Nations Security Council and organized according to its Statute, annexed to that Resolution;
b. cooperation with the International Criminal Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Genocide and Other Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of Rwanda and Rwandan Citizens responsible for genocide and other such violations committed in the territory of neighbouring States, between 1 January 1994 and 31 December 1994, established by resolution 955 (1994) of the United Nations Security Council and organized according to its Statute, annexed to that resolution.
The Federal Council may extend the scope of this order in cooperation with other international tribunals established by the Security Council of the United Nations to prosecute persons responsible for serious violations of international humanitarian law, whether those courts have the status and powers similar to those enjoyed by the courts established by Resolutions 827 and 955. 
Switzerland, Decree on Cooperation with the International Tribunals Act, 1995, Article 1.
Switzerland’s Law on Cooperation with the International Tribunals (1995), as amended in 2009, states:
1. This … [law] governs:
a. cooperation with the International Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of the Former Yugoslavia since 1991, established by resolution 827 (1993) of the United Nations Security Council and organized according to its Statute, annexed to that Resolution;
b. cooperation with the International Criminal Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Genocide and Other Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of Rwanda and Rwandan Citizens responsible for genocide and other such violations committed in the territory of neighbouring States, between 1 January 1994 and 31 December 1994, established by resolution 955 (1994) of the United Nations Security Council and organized according to its Statute, annexed to that resolution.
2. The Federal Council may extend the scope of this … [law] to the cooperation with other international tribunals established by the Security Council of the United Nations to prosecute persons responsible for serious violations of international humanitarian law if those courts have the status and competences similar to those enjoyed by the tribunals established by Resolutions 827 and 955. 
Switzerland, Law on Cooperation with the International Tribunals, 1995, as amended in 2009, Article 1.
The Law also states:
Scope of the cooperation
The present … [law] governs all modes of cooperation with the international tribunals, in particular:
a. the spontaneous provision of information and evidence … ;
b. the cessation of Swiss jurisdiction … ;
c. the transfer of prosecuted persons … ;
d. procedural acts and other official acts demanded by the international tribunals (other acts of assistance) … ;
e. the execution of punishments of deprivation of liberty pronounced by the international tribunals. 
Switzerland, Law on Cooperation with the International Tribunals, 1995, as amended in 2009, Article 3(1).
Switzerland’s Law on Cooperation with the ICC (2001) states:
1. This law shall govern cooperation with the International Criminal Court (Court), established by the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court of 17 July 1998 (Statute).
2. It shall regulate in particular:
a. the surrender of persons being prosecuted and of persons convicted by the Court (Chapter 3);
b. other forms of cooperation (Chapter 4);
c. the enforcement of penalties of the Court (Chapter 5). 
Switzerland, Law on Cooperation with the ICC, 2001, Article 1.
Switzerland’s Law on Cooperation with the International Criminal Court (2001), as amended in 2007, states:
1. This law shall govern cooperation with the International Criminal Court (Court) created by the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court of 17 July 1998 (Statute).
2. It shall regulate in particular:
a. the surrender of persons being prosecuted and of persons convicted by the Court …;
b. other forms of cooperation … ;
c. the enforcement of penalties of the Court. 
Switzerland, Law on Cooperation with the International Criminal Court, 2001, as amended in 2007, Article 1.
The Law also states:
Forms of cooperation
Cooperation … may include any procedural act not prohibited by Swiss law that facilitates the investigation and criminal prosecution of crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court or that serves to produce the proceeds of such crimes, in particular:
a. the identification and determination of the whereabouts of persons not being prosecuted by the Court or the locating of objects;
b. the taking of evidence, including testimony under oath, and the production of evidence, including expert opinions and reports necessary to the Court;
c. the questioning of any person being investigated or prosecuted;
d. the service of documents, including judicial documents;
e. the temporary transfer of persons in detention as provided in article 39;
f. the examination of places or sites, including the exhumation and examination of bodies buried in collective graves;
g. the execution of searches and seizures;
h. the provision of records and documents, including official records and documents;
i. the protection of victims and witnesses and the preservation of evidence;
j. the identification, tracing and freezing or seizure of proceeds, property and assets and instrumentalities of crimes for the purpose of eventual forfeiture. 
Switzerland, Law on Cooperation with the International Criminal Court, 2001, as amended in 2007, Article 30; see also Articles 39–41.
Switzerland’s Ordinance on Cooperation with the Special Tribunal for Sierra Leone (2003) states:
The field of application of the order of 21 December 1995 on the cooperation with international tribunals tasked with prosecuting serious violations of international humanitarian law is extended to the cooperation with the Special Tribunal for Sierra Leone. 
Switzerland, Ordinance on Cooperation with the Special Tribunal for Sierra Leone, 2003, Article 1.
Switzerland’s Military Criminal Code (1927), taking into account amendments entered into force up to 2011, which also contains a chapter on war crimes, states in the part on general provisions:
Art. 10
1 If the personal conditions are fulfilled, the present code is applicable both to offences committed in Switzerland and to those committed abroad.
1bis The present code applies to persons mentioned in art. 5 [paragraph 1], number 1, letter d and number 5, who have committed abroad one of the acts under … chapter 6bis [war crimes] of Part 2 or art. 114a [punishability of superiors] if they are present in Switzerland, unless they are extradited or transferred to an international criminal court whose jurisdiction is recognized by Switzerland.
1ter Where the victim of the act carried out abroad is not Swiss and the perpetrator is not Swiss, the prosecution, with the exception of measures to secure evidence, may be abandoned or may be dispensed with in the following cases:
a. a foreign authority or an international criminal court whose jurisdiction is recognized by Switzerland is prosecuting the offence and the suspected perpetrator is extradited or delivered to the court;
b. the suspected perpetrator is no longer in Switzerland and is not expected to return there;
c. the necessary evidence cannot be obtained.
1quater The present code applies to persons who have committed abroad, against a Swiss military person, one of the acts under … chapter 6bis [war crimes] of Part 2 or art. 114a [punishability of superiors], if they are present in Switzerland or have been extradited there because of this act, unless they are extradited or transferred to an international criminal court whose jurisdiction is recognized by Switzerland. 
Switzerland, Military Criminal Code, 1927, taking into account amendments entered into force up to 2011, Article 10(1)–(1quater). The German language version of Article 10(1ter)(b) notes: “the suspected perpetrator is no longer in Switzerland and is not expected to return there; or”.
[footnotes in original omitted]
Switzerland’s Penal Code (1937), taking into account amendments entered into force up to 2011, states in the common provisions under the titles on genocide and crimes against humanity and on war crimes:
Art. 264m
1 A person who carries out an act under Title 12bis and 12ter [on war crimes] or Art. 264k [on the criminal liability of superiors] while abroad is guilty of an offence if he is in Switzerland and is not extradited to another State or delivered to an international criminal court whose jurisdiction is recognised by Switzerland.
2 Where the victim of the act carried out abroad is not Swiss and the perpetrator is not Swiss, the prosecution, with the exception of measures to secure evidence, may be abandoned or may be dispensed with in the following cases:
a. a foreign authority or an international criminal court whose jurisdiction is recognised by Switzerland is prosecuting the offence and the suspected perpetrator is extradited or delivered to the court;
b. the suspected perpetrator is no longer in Switzerland and is not expected to return there. 
Switzerland, Penal Code, 1937, taking into account amendments entered into force up to 2011, Article 264m (1)–(2). The German, Italian and Romansh language versions of Article 264m (2)(a) note: “a foreign authority or an international criminal court whose jurisdiction is recognized by Switzerland is prosecuting the offence and the suspected perpetrator is extradited or delivered to the court; or”.
In the Musema case in 1997, Switzerland agreed to surrender to the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda an accused of Rwandan nationality arrested in Switzerland in 1995 for violations of the laws of war in Rwanda, pursuant to Article 109 of the Swiss Military Criminal Code as amended and provisions of the Decree on Cooperation with the International Tribunals. 
Switzerland, Federal Court, Musema case, Judgment, 28 April 1997.
In 1994, in its comments on the report of the Working Group on a draft statute for an international criminal court, Switzerland stated:
Indeed, the cooperation thus contemplated between the national administrative and judicial authorities on the one hand and the court on the other seems to be essential in order to ensure the effective functioning of the Court. In this connection, however, the draft fails to pronounce on the surrender of nationals … this silence no doubt means that such surrender may be demanded by the court. However, certain countries refuse to extradite their nationals. Would it therefore not be preferable to determine the fate of the nationals of the State concerned by applying to it the principle of aut dedere aut judicare? 
Switzerland, Comments of 8 February 1994 on the report of the Working Group on a draft statute for an international criminal court, UN Doc. A/CN.4/458, 18 February 1994, p. 37.
In 2008, in its sixth periodic report to the UN Committee against Torture, Switzerland stated in the section on universal jurisdiction:
The military justice system has had occasion, on the basis of article 3 (1), sect. 9, and articles 108 to 114 of the Military Criminal Code, to prosecute and try alleged war criminals (violation of the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949). During the reporting period, the military courts handled 25 such cases. … Of the six cases concerning Rwanda, … two were transferred to the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda. 
Switzerland, Sixth periodic report to the Committee against Torture, 18 March 2009, UN Doc. CAT/C/CHE/6, submitted 2 July 2008, § 110.
In 2008, in a statement before the UN General Assembly on the ICC Report, the permanent representative of Switzerland stated:
While the [1998 ICC] Statute provides the Court with the legal means to fulfil its tasks, it does not grant it the competence to implement its decisions. The Court therefore heavily relies on the cooperation of States to accomplish its tasks. In this context, we welcome the cooperation of certain States, which made possible in particular the transfer of three defendants in the course of the year under review, in connection with the situations in the Democratic Republic of Congo and the Central African Republic. However, we are concerned that at the moment no less than seven arrest warrants are still pending execution. My delegation would like to stress that it is the responsibility of States, in accordance with the Rome Statute and the obligations under the United Nations Charter, to support the Court and to cooperate fully with it. Without the cooperation of States, the Court will simply not be able to fulfil the mandate that has been entrusted to it.
As underlined in the report presented by President Kirsch, the cooperation of States is not limited to the execution of arrest warrants but also covers other activities such as the protection of witnesses. This cooperation concerns in particular those States affected by situations being examined by the Court, as well as their neighbouring States. Switzerland considers the protection of witnesses to be a central element in the good governance of international criminal justice. It commends the measures that have been taken and the new methods of protection that have been put in place in cooperation with national and local authorities to strengthen witness protection.
Still in the area of cooperation, my delegation welcomes the continuing collaboration between the United Nations and the Court. This cooperation is essential at several levels, particularly for the facilitation of the Court’s operations on the ground. It is imperative that it should continue in future. 
Switzerland, Statement by the permanent representative of Switzerland before the UN General Assembly on the Report of the International Criminal Court, 30 October 2008, pp. 2–3.
Switzerland’s ABC of International Humanitarian Law (2009) states:
Introduction
… States are obliged to … either themselves prosecute persons responsible for grave breaches, in particular of war crimes, or extradite such persons. If a State is either unwilling or unable to undertake prosecutions then, as appropriate, the responsibility passes to the International Criminal Court in The Hague. Furthermore, the international community has set up international ad hoc tribunals for the prosecution of crimes committed in the context of specific conflicts (e.g. the International Criminal Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and for Rwanda).
International Criminal Court (ICC)
The International Criminal Court in The Hague prosecutes individuals for the most serious crimes of international concern: Genocide, Crimes against humanity and War crimes. … The ICC plays a complementary role, i.e. it only steps in once it becomes clear that the national authorities primarily responsible for prosecution are either unwilling or unable genuinely to carry out the necessary investigation and prosecution. 
Switzerland, Federal Department of Foreign Affairs, ABC of International Humanitarian Law, 2009, pp. 4 and 26.
In 2009, in its Report on Foreign Policy, Switzerland’s Federal Council stated:
Switzerland has also shown its continued support to the [International Criminal] Court financially through regular and spontaneous contributions, in particular to the Trust Fund for Victims, as well as through cooperation with the Court. In this context, Switzerland will examine during the next two years the possibility of ratifying the Agreement on privileges and immunities of the ICC that it signed in September 2002. 
Switzerland, Federal Council, Report on Foreign Policy 2009, 2 September 2009, Section 3.3.7.4, p. 5814.
[emphasis in original]
In 2012, in a statement at the 19th Special Session of the UN Human Rights Council, Switzerland’s representative stated:
Switzerland calls on the [UN] Security Council to immediately refer the situation to the International Criminal Court. Given the absence of willingness on the side of the Syrian authorities to genuinely investigate or prosecute, the Court is the international body best suited to prosecute and try alleged perpetrators … of war crimes. 
Switzerland, Statement by the representative of Switzerland at the 19th Special Session of the UN Human Rights Council during the debate on the deteriorating human rights situation in the Syrian Arab Republic and the recent killings in El-Houleh, 1 June 2012.
In 2012, in a statement before the UN Security Council during a debate on the promotion and strengthening of the rule of law in the maintenance of international peace and security, the permanent representative of Switzerland stated:
When a State fails to assume its primary responsibility to protect its population and to investigate and prosecute mass atrocities, the International Criminal Court must be tasked to step in as a measure of last resort. …
In this vein, the situation in the Syrian Arab Republic − where heinous crimes are committed on a daily basis − is of particular concern. We deplore that the Syrian Arab Republic has, so far, not reacted to repeated calls from the international community to ensure accountability through a national procedure that is credible, fair and independent. Therefore, Switzerland calls on the Security Council to refer the situation in Syria to the Court in order to address all allegations of grave crimes irrespective of who committed them. …
At the very least, the Security Council should send out an unequivocal warning urging all parties to the conflict to fully respect international human rights and humanitarian law in the ongoing conflict and announce that it intends to refer the situation to the International Criminal Court unless a credible, fair and independent accountability process is being established in a timely manner. We note that a growing number of Member States shares our plea and we encourage all other States to join our initiative for a letter to the Security Council on Syria.
… [R]eferrals should contain no exemptions for nationals from non[-]States Parties. Furthermore, it is necessary that the Security Council determinedly follows up on referral resolutions. As shown by the high number of outstanding arrest warrants, cooperation from States is one of the most significant challenges faced by the Court, particularly in referred situations. Referrals should not be the end of the Security Council’s commitment to end impunity. 
Switzerland, Statement by the permanent representative of Switzerland before the UN Security Council during a debate on the promotion and strengthening of the rule of law in the maintenance of international peace and security, UN Doc. S/PV.6849, 17 October 2012.
In 2012, on the occasion of Public International Law Day, the head of Switzerland’s Federal Department of Foreign Affairs stated:
… Switzerland is strongly committed to the fight against impunity. It supports the work of the International Criminal Court.
In the case of Syria, a Swiss initiative, which today has the support of 35 countries, intends to call on the [UN] Security Council to refer the situation to the International Criminal Court. 
Switzerland, Speech by the head of the Federal Department of Foreign Affairs on the occasion of Public International Law Day, 19 October 2012.
In 2012, in a statement before the UN General Assembly on “Item 74: Report of the International Criminal Court”, the permanent representative of Switzerland stated:
Peace should not and cannot be obtained at the expense of justice. Therefore, Switzerland continues to believe that the situation in the Syrian Arabic Republic should be brought under the jurisdiction of the [International Criminal] Court. Crimes committed in Syria, irrespective of who committed them, must not go unpunished. We note that a growing number of Member States support our initiative for a letter to the [UN] Security Council on Syria and we encourage others to join us.
A referral is necessary not only because of the grave crimes committed in Syria; it would also demonstrate the commitment of the Security Council to the fight against impunity. In order to enhance the deterrent effect of international criminal justice, the Council should adopt a consistent referral policy and determinedly follow up on referrals. A decision to refer a situation should not be the end of the commitment of the Security Council to the fight against impunity. It should be the beginning. Two additional points in this context: The United Nations should consider funding to the Court for referrals, as provided for in the Relationship Agreement. And it should be noted that the [1998] Rome Statute does not provide for the possibility to make exceptions in the referrals for nationals from non[]States Parties.
With respect to the relationship between the United Nations and the Court, my delegation also wishes to welcome the reporting of the Secretary-General on the implementation of Article 3 of the Relationship Agreement where he expresses his determination to limit the contact of UN officials with persons who are the subject of arrest warrants to absolutely essential contacts. This policy is important for the credibility of the United Nations and the Court in the fight against impunity.
The Court not only needs our full support here at the United Nations. It also needs it at home. Cooperation by States is fundamental but regrettably, the high number of outstanding arrest warrants over-shadows the many positive examples of cooperation. We urge all States to increase their efforts to bring suspects to justice. The International Criminal Court also depends on effective implementation legislation in all States Parties. The complementarity provided for in the Rome Statute can only come into play if States bolster their capacity to prosecute perpetrators of ICC crimes before their national authorities. 
Switzerland, Statement by the permanent representative of Switzerland before the UN General Assembly on “Item 74: Report of the International Criminal Court”, 6 November 2012.
In 2013, Switzerland’s Federal Department of Foreign Affairs issued the “Strategy on the protection of civilians in armed conflicts”, which states:
Switzerland is … committed to the fight against impunity. It supports the International Criminal Court (ICC) and other international criminal tribunals. The action of these judicial institutions must be complemented by measures designed to satisfy the rights of victims to the truth, to reparation and to the non-recurrence of violations. Only in this manner can people truly come to terms with the past.
… In situations where states are unwilling or unable to prosecute the perpetrators of serious violations of international law, Switzerland will support recourse to international criminal bodies such as the International Criminal Court. 
Switzerland, Federal Department of Foreign Affairs, Strategy on the protection of civilians in armed conflicts, 2013, pp. 14–15.
In 2013, in its Report on Foreign Policy 2012, Switzerland’s Federal Council stated:
In 2012, Switzerland resolutely campaigned for international criminal justice, in particular through its support for the permanent International Criminal Court (ICC) … We would like to use the opportunity of our ambassador in The Hague being the Vice-President of the Assembly of the States Parties … to double our efforts and to allow this institution to fulfill its mission: to fight against impunity. More concretely, we strive to improve the cooperation between States and between States and the ICC, as well as to increase the number of State parties. Furthermore, in 2012 we have started to work on the ratification of the amendments adopted at the Kampala Review Conference, which add … new forms of war crimes under the ICC jurisdiction … Regarding the International Criminal Tribunal for Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), in order to be able to cooperate with the international mechanism tasked to exercise the residual functions for the two tribunals, in July 2012 Switzerland amended its legislation. 
Switzerland, Federal Council, Report on Foreign Policy 2012, 9 January 2013, pp. 950-951.
In 2013, in a statement at the 23rd Session of the UN Human Rights Council, Switzerland’s representative stated:
Violations of international humanitarian law continue to be committed by all parties to the conflict … Switzerland reiterates its call on the [UN] Security Council to refer the situation in Syria to the International Criminal Court. The fight against impunity is an essential prerequisite for establishing lasting peace in Syria. 
Switzerland, Statement by the representative of Switzerland at the 23rd Session of the UN Human Rights Council during the debate on the deteriorating situation of human rights in the Syrian Arab Republic, and the recent killings in Al-Qusayr, 29 May 2013.
In 2013 in a statement during an interactive dialogue with the UN Commission of Inquiry on Syria at the 23rd Session of the UN Human Rights Council, the representative of Switzerland stated:
Violations … of international humanitarian law continue to be perpetrated by all parties to the conflict … Switzerland reiterates its call on the [UN] Security Council to refer the situation in Syria to the International Criminal Court. The fight against impunity is a key prerequisite for the establishment of lasting peace in Syria and must be duly taken into account during the political negotiations. 
Switzerland, Statement by the representative of Switzerland during an interactive dialogue with the UN Commission of Inquiry on Syria at the 23rd Session of the UN Human Rights Council, 4 June 2013.
In 2013, in answer to a written question in Parliament, the head of Switzerland’s Federal Department of Foreign Affairs stated: “On 14 January 2013, at the initiative of Switzerland, 58 States have addressed a letter to the UN Security Council calling for the referral of the situation in Syria to the International Criminal Court.”  
Switzerland, Answer by the head of the Federal Department of Foreign Affairs to written questions 13.5206 and 13.5207 in Parliament regarding the chemical weapons in Syria and the referral to the International Criminal Court, 10 June 2013.
In 2013, in a statement before the UN Security Council during a debate on children and armed conflict, made on behalf of the Friends of Children and Armed Conflict, including Switzerland, the permanent representative of Canada stated:
Holding perpetrators to account [for] grave violations against children continues to be rare … and yet is a crucial element towards protecting children’s rights. … In those cases where national authorities are unwilling or unable to hold perpetrators to account, due to lack of capacity or resources for instance, international justice mechanisms, including through the work of the International Criminal Court, and ad hoc and mixed tribunals, can and should play a complementary role. 
Switzerland, Statement by the permanent representative of Canada before the UN Security Council during a debate on children and armed conflict, made on behalf of the Friends of Children and Armed Conflict, namely Andorra, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Benin, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Ghana, Guatemala, Hungary, Italy, Japan, Jordan, Liechtenstein, Mali, Mexico, Namibia, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Peru, Portugal, San Marino, Slovenia, Slovakia, South Africa, the Republic of Korea, Sweden, Switzerland, Tanzania and Uruguay, 17 June 2013, p. 2.
In 2013 in a statement during an interactive dialogue with the Commission of Inquiry on Syria and the UN Special Rapporteur on the human rights of internally displaced persons at the 24th Session of the UN Human Rights Council, the representative of Switzerland stated:
My delegation condemns in the strongest terms the ongoing violations … of international humanitarian law that are being perpetrated in Syria with absolute impunity.
Switzerland reiterates its call on the [UN] Security Council to refer the situation in Syria to the International Criminal Court. 
Switzerland, Statement by the representative of Switzerland during an interactive dialogue with the UN Commission of Inquiry on Syria and the UN Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights of Internally Displaced Persons at the 24th Session of the UN Human Rights Council, 16 September 2013.