1/5
The National Council debated tightening of sexual criminal law on Monday. Among other things, the “Only yes means yes” solution was up for debate.
Sophie ReinhardtEditor Politics
Sexual assault is now considered rape when a perpetrator “forces a woman to have sex, in particular by threatening her, using violence, putting her under psychological pressure or making her unable to resist”.
With this so-called principle of coercion, the applicable Swiss sexual criminal law defines a rape. Parliament now wants to change that. In the future, instead of coercion, the focus will be on consent to sexual activity.
But that was the end of the unity in the Council. The debate lasting several hours in the National Council on the evening of the month is primarily about how this approval should be given.
New rule is a “quantum leap”
The bourgeois camp was largely of the view that rape only occurs when a person says no verbally or expresses it unequivocally. The rule is called “No means no”.
Die Linke and the GLP were in favor of the fact that a rape is also given if a person does not say no, but also does not express a clear yes. The rule applies as “Only yes means yes”.
The “no is no” solution cements the principle that women are generally available for sex as long as they do not resist,” said GLP National Councilor Judith Bellaiche (51). This so-called presumption of consent is outdated and has nothing to do with sexual self-determination.
The members of the FDP and the center did not follow a single line. No matter which model the National Council ultimately chooses, the revised law is a “quantum leap” anyway, because coercion as a constituent element of rape is no longer applicable, said Mitte parliamentary group leader Philipp Matthias Bregy (44). “So a victim no longer has to fight back, that’s what’s really important about this template.”
With 99 votes to 88 (with 3 abstentions), the National Council decided to introduce the “only yes means yes” solution in sexual criminal law.
SVP was almost in agreement
Alone in her party with her opinion was Celine Amaudruz (43). Even before the debate, the SVPerin announced in a Facebook post that the yes means yes variant was in favor: “I don’t understand why only a yes is a yes in professional life, in clubs or in society, but no longer in emotional and love life,” says Amaudruz.
The responsible Minister of Justice Karin Keller-Sutter (58) warned against too high expectations. The modernization of the new sexual criminal law would not solve the problem that many rapes are not reported in the first place. An important step is now being taken, but the difficulties in proving it would not be eliminated.
In addition, Keller-Sutter pointed out that the “only yes means yes” rule could not prevent a potential victim from saying yes out of fear or uncertainty. She therefore campaigned on behalf of the Federal Council for the ‘no is no’ solution.
As early as the summer, a majority of the Council of States voted in favor of “No means no”. Now he will have to deal with the template again.