Police want more time to investigate violent protests. Human-rights groups fear that suspects’ legal protections could suffer.
A year after a pro-Palestinian demonstration in Bern turned violent, Swiss lawmakers are moving to double the time suspects can be held in police custody.
The riots in Bern on October 11th 2025 were unusually violent by Swiss standards. Some 5,000 people joined an unauthorised pro-Palestinian demonstration that left 18 police officers injured, four of whom required hospital examinations. Property damage ran into millions of Swiss francs. Police detained 536 people for questioning and identity checks. The scale of the violence and the police response was striking in a country where such unrest is relatively rare.
This week, Switzerland’s National Council followed the Council of States in backing, in principle, an increase in the maximum period of police detention from 24 to 48 hours. But how the change would work in practice remains unclear, reported SRF.
Under current rules, police must release suspects or hand them over to prosecutors within 24 hours. That is not always enough, particularly after violent demonstrations involving dozens of arrests, argues Max Hofmann, secretary-general of the Association of Swiss Police Officers.
Mr Hofmann welcomes the proposed extension. An extra day, he says, would allow officers to investigate incidents more thoroughly and establish each suspect’s alleged role.
A tighter deadline for prosecutors
But giving police more time could leave prosecutors and courts with less. Under the existing framework, judicial authorisation of continued detention must be obtained within 96 hours. Extending police custody would therefore compress the time available for prosecutors to prepare their cases and for judges to review them.
Alicia Giraudel, a lawyer at Amnesty International, worries that the change could undermine suspects’ procedural rights. “It is questionable whether all procedural rights can be upheld within this short timeframe and whether the detention review can then take place,” she says.
The Federal Council, Switzerland’s executive, has also raised concerns about the practical difficulties.
Mr Hofmann is unconvinced. If police have more time to prepare a comprehensive case file, he argues, prosecutors should be able to work more efficiently. Better investigations at the outset could make subsequent proceedings quicker.
Ms Giraudel remains opposed to the proposal on more fundamental grounds. “The longer police custody lasts, the more serious the violation of human rights,” she argues.
Deterrence or punishment?
Mr Hofmann also sees a possible deterrent effect. Spending an extra day in custody after a violent protest might make demonstrators think twice before resorting to violence again.
“If, for example, you don’t show up for work on Monday and are asked: ‘Where were you?’ that could have the effect that you might prefer to refrain from violence at the next demonstration,” he says.
For Ms Giraudel, that argument crosses a line. Police custody is intended to facilitate investigations, not to punish suspects or discourage political participation. The presumption of innocence, she stresses, applies until a person has been convicted.
Parliament and the upper house have both signalled their support for longer detention. It now falls to the Federal Council to work out how the change could be implemented.
The challenge is not merely procedural. Switzerland must decide how much power to give police in the aftermath of violent protests, while ensuring that prosecutors and courts have sufficient time to protect suspects’ rights. Whether an extension to 48 hours can satisfy both objectives—and comply with the European Convention on Human Rights—remains an open question.
For more stories like this on Switzerland follow us on Facebook and X.
