Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Human Dignity: Conceptual Unity and Plurality of Content in Swiss Law

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Reality of Human Dignity in Law and Bioethics

Part of the book series: Ius Gentium: Comparative Perspectives on Law and Justice ((IUSGENT,volume 71))

  • 453 Accesses

Abstract

Swiss law makes extensive reference to human dignity, both in the field of biomedicine and throughout the law generally. The Federal Constitution recognizes dignity as a fundamental right and it is a core principle of the rule of law. Human dignity is relied upon to protect from the beginning of the embryo right through to the dead body. As such, dignity recognizes the intrinsic value of every human being and is absolute. In the case law, respect for human dignity reveals the interaction between the individual and the community.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Federal Court judgment (ATF) of January 25, 2006, ATF 132 I 49: “Er betrifft das letztlich nicht fassbare Eigentliche des Menschen und der Menschen und ist unter Mitbeachtung kollektiver Anschauungen ausgerichtet auf Anerkennung des Einzelnen in seiner eigenen Werthaftigkeit und individuellen Einzig – und allfälligen Andersartigkeit” (recital 5.1, p. 55).

  2. 2.

    The Federal Court qualifies this notion as “Handlungsanweisung” (Federal Court, March 22, 2001, ATF 127 I, recit. 5b, p. 14).

  3. 3.

    Federal Court, March 25, 1964, ATF 90 I 29, recit. 3c, p. 37.

  4. 4.

    Federal Court, March 15, 1989, ATF 115 Ia 234, recit. 10b, p. 269.

  5. 5.

    Federal Court, June 28, 1972, ATF 98 Ia 508, recit. 8b, p. 522.

  6. 6.

    This right became Article 12 of the Federal Constitution (RS 101).

  7. 7.

    Feuille Fédérale, 2003, p. 1089 (available at: https://www.admin.ch); Peissard, O. 2008. La dignité humaine dans le droit suisse et international relatif au génie génétique, thesis. Yverdon-les-Bains, 131.

  8. 8.

    Schweizer, R. J., Reusser, R. (2002). Article 119, § 14. In Die schweizerische Bundesverfassung, ed. B. Ehrenzeller, P. Mastronardi, R. J. Schweizer, K. A. Vallender, 1220. Zurich, Bâle, Genève: Schulthess.

  9. 9.

    Federal Council, Message, Feuille Fédérale, 1996, III, 197, § 22.01, p. 214.

  10. 10.

    Article 119, para. 2 of the Federal Constitution.

  11. 11.

    Article 24 novies, para. 3 of the Constitution stipulates that “any use of the reproductive and genetic material of animals, plants and other organisms must respect the dignity of the creature” (in German: “Würde der Kreatur”). In 1999, this became Article 120, para. 2, and the French version of Article 120, para. 2 replaced the notion of the “dignity of the creature” with the notion of the “integrity of living organisms”. (The English translation at: https://www.admin.ch/opc/en/classified-compilation/19995395/201506140000/101.pdf uses the term “dignity of living beings”). The reference to the dignity of animals is contained in the Animal Protection Act of December 16th, 2005 (RS 455). Article 3 of the Animal Protection Act defines dignity as “the inherent worth of the animal that has to be respected when dealing with it. If any strain imposed on the animal cannot be justified by overriding interests, this constitutes a disregard for the animal’s dignity. Strain is deemed to be present in particular if pain, suffering or harm is inflicted on the animal, if it is exposed to anxiety or humiliation, if there is major interference with its appearance or its abilities or if it is excessively instrumentalized”. Thus, when the interests of constraint must be weighed against the interests in question, the dignity of the animal must be taken into consideration and will be respected if the balance leans in favour of dominant interests. In addition, the Federal Act on Non-Human Genetic Engineering of March 21, 2003 (RS 814.91) in Article 8, para. 1 specifies situations in which dignity is not respected. As a result, in the non-human area, dignity is not an absolute value and dominating interests could justify a violation of dignity.

  12. 12.

    Article 7 of the Federal Constitution.

  13. 13.

    Its status is now that of an “autonomous subsidiary fundamental right” (Federal Council, Message relating to the constitutional Article concerning research on human beings of September 12, 2007, 07.072, Feuille Fédérale, 2007, p. 6345 and s., § 5.1.2, p. 6372); see also Federal Court, January 25, 2006, ATF 132 I 49, recit. 5.1, p. 54.

  14. 14.

    Becchi, P. (2007). Das Puzzle der Menschenwürde. In Interdisziplinäre Wege in der juristischen Grundlagenforschung, ed. P. Becchi, C. B. Graber and M. Lumminati, 157 and s., 172. Zurich, Bâle, Genève: Schulthess.

  15. 15.

    Mastronardi, P. (2002). Ad Article 7, § 23–28. In Die schweizerische Bundesverfassung, ed. B. Ehrenzeller, P. Mastronardi, R. J. Schweizer, K. A. Vallender, 83–84. Genève, Zurich, Bâle: Schulthess.

  16. 16.

    Federal Council, Message relating to a constitutional Article on transplant medicine, dated April 23, 1997, Feuille Fédérale, 1997, III, 613 and s., § 241.4, p. 638.

  17. 17.

    Article 118b, para. 1 of the Federal Constitution.

  18. 18.

    Federal Council, Message relating to a constitutional Article on the human being dated September 12, 2007.

  19. 19.

    Article 118b, para. 1 of the Federal Constitution.

  20. 20.

    Federal Council, Message relating to a constitutional Article on the human being dated September 12, 2007, 07.072, Feuille Fédérale, 2007, 6345 and s., § 2.2.2, p. 6353.

  21. 21.

    Ibid., p. 6354.

  22. 22.

    Feuille fédérale, 1989, III, 986 and s.

  23. 23.

    Federal Council, Message relating to a constitutional Article on the human being dated September 12, 2007, 07.072, Feuille Fédérale, 2007, 6345 and s., § 5.1.2, p. 6372.

  24. 24.

    Ibid., p. 6373.

  25. 25.

    The Federal Law on Medically Assisted Reproduction of December 18, 1998 (LPMA, RS 810.11); Federal Law on Research Involving Embryonic Stem Cells of December 19, 2003 (LRCS, RS 810.31); Federal Law on Human Genetic Testing of October 08, 2004 (LAGH, RS 810.12); Federal Law on the transplantation of organs, tissues and cells of October 08, 2004 (The Transplantation Act, RS 810.21); Federal Law on Research on Human Beings of September 30, 2011 (LRH, RS 810.30).

  26. 26.

    Federal Council, Message concerning the Federal Law on the transplantation of organs, tissues and cells of September 12, 2001, Feuille Fédérale, 2002, 19 (01.057), § 2.3.1, p. 129–130.

  27. 27.

    The Swiss Parliament refused to amend the Law on transplantation: it rejects the model of the presumed consent of a deceased donor and maintains that of explicit consent (National Council, no. 13.029, 05.03.2015).

  28. 28.

    Article 10, para. 3 Transplantation Act (Federal Law on the transplantation of organs, tissues and cells of October 08, 2004, RS 810.21); Article 8 Order on transplantation (Order on the transplantation of organs, tissues and cells of human origin of March 16, 2007, RS 810.211).

  29. 29.

    Federal Council, Message concerning the Federal Law on the transplantation of organs, tissues and cells of September 12, 2001, Feuille Fédérale, 2002, 19 (01.057), § 2.3.1, p. 130.

  30. 30.

    Article 4 Law on Research on Human Beings.

  31. 31.

    Article 9 Law on Research on Human Beings; Federal Council, Message on the Law on Research on Human Beings of October 21, 2009, Feuille Fédérale, 2009, 7259 (09.079), § 2.1.2.6, p. 7315.

  32. 32.

    Ibid., p. 7341.

  33. 33.

    Article 119, Federal Cst.

  34. 34.

    Council, Message concerning the federal law on the transplantation of organs, tissues and cells of September 12, 2001, Feuille Fédérale, 2002, 19 (01.057), § 2.4.9.1, p. 158.

  35. 35.

    Federal Council, Message of November 20, 2002 (02.083), Feuille Fédérale, 2003, p. 1065, p. 1089: the embryo in vitro benefits from the protection of human dignity, but this is not a subjective right.

  36. 36.

    Manaï, D. (2013). Considérations juridico-éthiques pour légitimer la recherche sur un embryon in vitro. In Éthique et Droit en matière de Bioéthique, ed. B. Winiger, P. Becchi, P. Avramov, M. Bacher, 63–79. Franz Steiner Verlag, coll. “Archiv für Rechts-und Sozialphilosophie”, no. 138; Rütsche, B. (2013). Reproduktionmedizin und Embryonenforschung: Legitimität der geltenden Forschungsverbote? In Éthique et Droit en matière de Bioéthique, ed. B. Winiger, P. Becchi, P. Avramov, M. Bacher, 81–98. Franz Steiner Verlag, coll. “Archiv für Rechts-und Sozialphilosophie”, no. 138; Cordier, A. (2007). Recherche sur les cellules souches issues d’embryons surnuméraires et clonage scientifique: inquiétude éthique. Revue d’éthique et de théologie morale, 2(244):41 and s., 57; Maio, G. (2002). Ethik der Forschung an verwaisten Embryonen – Erläuterungen zum Respektmodell. Bioethica Forum, 37:22 and s., 25; Neirinck, C. (2003). Comment se débarrasser de l’article 119 de la Constitution fédérale? In Les cellules souches embryonnaires, un défi mais pour qui?, ed. D. Sprumont and M. Trutmann, 55 and s., 57. IDS Report, no. 3.

  37. 37.

    ATF 119 Ia 460 c. 12.

  38. 38.

    Message of the Federal Council of November 20, 2002, Feuille Fédérale, 2003, p. 1095.

  39. 39.

    Article 3, para. 2 c, Federal law on embryonic stem cells. Article 24, para. 1 b, law on embryonic stem cells sanctions the violation of this prohibition by a prison sentence.

  40. 40.

    Article 17, para. 3, Law on ART is repealed.

  41. 41.

    See Article 5, para. 4 Law on Stem Cell Research, Article 10 LSCR.

  42. 42.

    Article 1, para. 3 Law CC.

  43. 43.

    In fact, Switzerland has a monistic conception of international law.

  44. 44.

    Rütsche, B. (2010). The role of human dignity in the Swiss legal system. Arguing for a dualistic notion of human dignity. Journal international de bioethique, 21(4):83 and s., 86.

  45. 45.

    Federal Court, 22 September 1945, ATF 71 III 147; Federal Court, February 26, 1954, ATF 80 III 20, recit. 3, p. 24.

  46. 46.

    Federal Court, October 27, 1995, ATF 121 I 367, JdT, 1997, recit. 2b and 2c, p. 278.

  47. 47.

    Article 12 of the Federal Constitution.

  48. 48.

    Federal Court, June 11, 2010, ATF 136 I 254, recit. 4.2; Federal Court, March 20, 2009, ATF 135 I 119, recit. 5.3.

  49. 49.

    Federal Court, March 18, 2005, ATF 131 I 166, JdT, 2007, I, p. 75, recit. 7.1.

  50. 50.

    Article 92 Debt Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law (RS 281.1).

  51. 51.

    Federal Court, January 14, 2004, ATF 130 I 71, recit. 4.1, p. 75.

  52. 52.

    Article 8, para. 2 of the Federal Constitution.

  53. 53.

    Peissard, O. (2008). La dignité humaine dans le droit suisse et international relatif au génie génétique, op. cit., 176.

  54. 54.

    Federal Court, December 16, 2008, ATF 135 I 49, JdT, 2009, I, p. 655, recit. 4.1; Federal Court, February 27, 2008, ATF 134 I 49, JdT, 2009, I, recit. 3, p. 223.

  55. 55.

    Federal Court, October 06, 2004, ATF 131 IV 23, JdT, 2006, IV, p. 88; Federal Court, November 03, 1999, ATF 126 IV 20. By a judgment of December 12, 2007, the Federal Court confirmed the conviction for racial discrimination of the Turkish politician, Dogu Perinçek. He had qualified the Armenian genocide as an “international lie” (Federal Court, 6B_398/2007). The judges considered that this statement was a violation of the dignity of the members of the Armenian community who identify with the memory of the 1915 genocide. Perinçek appealed to the European Court of Human Rights. The ECHR ruled in his favour, considering that his freedom of expression had been violated (Perinçek case against Switzerland, December 17, 2013, petition no. 27510/08, § 107, §§ 119–126, §§ 129–130). On March 11, 2014, Switzerland appealed to the Grand Chamber.

  56. 56.

    Federal Court, September 11, 2000, ATF 126 II 377, recit. 6. Biometric identification systems involve a risk of violations of human dignity (Federal Commissioner for Data Protection and Transparency, Guide relatif aux systèmes de reconnaissance biométriques, Bern, September 2009).

  57. 57.

    See, for example, Federal Court, June 13, 2012, ATF 138 I 217, JdT, 2013, I, recit. 3.3.3, p. 27; Federal Court, August 31, 2010, ATF 136 I 297, recit. 7.4.

  58. 58.

    See, for example, Federal Court, July 07, 2009, ATF 135 I 265; Federal Court, May 12, 2004, ATF 130 I 140, JdT, 2006, I, 370; Federal Court, 9 July 2003, ATF 129 I 217, JdT, 2004, I, p. 574.

  59. 59.

    Article 261 bis Swiss Criminal Code (RS 311.0); Federal Court, February 06, 2014, ATF 140 IV 67, consid. 2.5; Federal Court, May 27, 2004, ATF 130 IV 111, recit. 5.1, p. 118; Federal Court, April 30, 1998, ATF 124 IV 121, recit. 2b, p. 124 and 125; Federal Court, December 05, 1997, ATF 123 IV 202, recit. 2, p. 206.

  60. 60.

    Federal Court, July 05, 2007, ATF 133 IV 308, recit. 8.2; Federal Court, October 06, 2004, ATF 131 IV 23, JdT, 2006, IV, recit. 1.1, p. 88.

  61. 61.

    Article 3 ECHR; Peissard, O. 2008. La dignité humaine dans le droit suisse et international relatif au génie génétique, op. cit., 178.

  62. 62.

    According to Article 3, para. 1 of the Criminal Procedure Code (of October 05, 2007, RS 312.0), “the criminal authorities respect the dignity of all the people involved in the procedure, in all of its different stages”.

  63. 63.

    “The detainee and the person involved in implementing a measure have the right to respect of their dignity” (Article 74 Swiss Criminal Code, RS 311.0); Federal Court, February 26, 2014, ATF 140 I 125, recit. 3.

  64. 64.

    Federal Court, June 05, 1998, ATF 124 I 231, 2b/bb; see also Federal Court, April 07, 1997, ATF 123 I 221, consider. 1c/cc (adequate surface of cells and adequate number of showers).

  65. 65.

    Federal Court, February 12, 1992, ATF 118 Ia 64, JdT, 2007, IV, recit. 3 h, p. 43.

  66. 66.

    Unlike the doctors, the Federal Court deemed that it does not constitute a disproportionate threat to personal freedom provided it is practiced in a dignified manner (Federal Court, August 26, 2010, ATF 136 IV 97, 6.1.2 and 6.3.3).

  67. 67.

    Article 197 Swiss Criminal Code.

  68. 68.

    Article 182 Swiss Criminal Code.

  69. 69.

    Federal Court, March 23, 1995, ATF 121 IV 86, recit. 2c, p. 90.

  70. 70.

    Article 28 Swiss Civil Code.

  71. 71.

    Article 173 Swiss Criminal Code.

  72. 72.

    Federal Court, September 16, 2011, ATF 137 IV 313,. 2.1.1 and 2.4.4.

  73. 73.

    Federal Court, August 23, 2007, ATF 134 III 193; Federal Court, May 27, 1996, ATF 92 IV 99, recit. 2.

  74. 74.

    Federal Court, March 08, 1991, ATF 117 IV 14, JdT, 1993, IV, recit. 4c/cc, p. 37.

  75. 75.

    Federal Court, January 07, 2004, ATF 130 I 16, recit. 3, p. 18; Federal Court, March 22, 2001, ATF 127 I 6, recit. 5 g; see also Federal Court, May 12, 2004, ATF 130 I 169, recit. 2.2. The Deontological Code states that “any medical treatment must be performed with respect for human dignity”, Article 4, para. 1 (Swiss Medical Association, Code in force since July 01, 1997, latest version May 08, 2014).

  76. 76.

    Article 426 Swiss Civil Code.

  77. 77.

    Federal Court, October 01, 2001, ATF 128 III 12, JdT, 2002, I, recit. 3, p. 474.

  78. 78.

    Federal Court, November 03, 2006, ATF 133 I 58, JdT, 2008, I, p. 349.

  79. 79.

    Federal Court, June 18, 2001, ATF 127 I 115, recit. 4.

  80. 80.

    Federal Court, May 07, 1999, ATF 125 I 300, JdT, 2001, I, recit. 2a, p. 302: Federal Court, April 16, 1997, ATF 123 I 112, recit. 4b.

  81. 81.

    Federal Court, September 18, 1985, ATF 111 Ia 231, recit. 3a and 3b, p. 233.

  82. 82.

    Federal Court, May 07, 1999, ATF 125 I 300, JdT, 2001, I, recit. 2b, p. 302.

  83. 83.

    CNE, Position paper no. 19/2012, Le consentement présumé en matière de don d’organes. Considérations éthiques, Bern, October 2012, § 2.1, p. 8.

  84. 84.

    See above 2.3.

  85. 85.

    Federal Court, December 22, 1993, ATF 119 Ia 460, JdT, 1995, I, recit. 10, p. 586.

  86. 86.

    National Ethics Commission on Human Medicine (CNE), Position paper no. 22/2013, La procréation médicalement assistée. Considérations éthiques et propositions pour l’avenir, Bern, December 2013.

  87. 87.

    CNE, Position paper no. 11/2006, La recherche sur les embryons et fœtus humains, Bern, January 2006, p. 54.

  88. 88.

    CNE, Position paper no. 4/2003, Le clonage reproductif de l’être humain, Bern, 2003, Recommendation no. 1.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Law, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland

    Dominique Manaï

Authors
  1. Dominique Manaï
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dominique Manaï .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Rennes, Rennes, France

    Brigitte Feuillet-Liger

  2. Columbia University, New York, USA

    Kristina Orfali

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Manaï, D. (2018). Human Dignity: Conceptual Unity and Plurality of Content in Swiss Law. In: Feuillet-Liger, B., Orfali, K. (eds) The Reality of Human Dignity in Law and Bioethics. Ius Gentium: Comparative Perspectives on Law and Justice, vol 71. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-99112-2_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-99112-2_8

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-99111-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-99112-2

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation