Personen, die verurteilt werden, weil sie die sexuelle Unversehrtheit eines Kindes oder einer abhängigen Person beeinträchtigt haben, verlieren endgültig das Recht, eine berufliche oder ehrenamtliche Tätigkeit mit Minderjährigen oder Abhängigen auszuüben.
Article 123c of the Federal Constitution prohibits persons for life from working with children or dependent persons. The prohibition applies to all those convicted of sexual offences against children or persons incapable of resistance or judgment.
Children are defined as persons under 16 years of age according to the Criminal Code. Dependent persons are people who cannot protect themselves due to disability, illness or a care relationship. The prohibition covers both professional and voluntary activities.
The court must impose the prohibition mandatorily (automatism). It has no discretion. Only in particularly minor cases may it exceptionally refrain from doing so if there is no risk of repetition. This exception is applied very rarely.
The prohibition is in principle lifelong. After ten years, the court may review whether it remains necessary. The constitutional provision was adopted by the Swiss people on 18 May 2014 with 63.5% yes votes. It stems from a popular initiative launched after sexual offences against children.
Example: A teacher is convicted of sexual acts with a 14-year-old pupil. The court must prohibit him for life from working as a teacher, coach or youth leader. He may also no longer volunteer at children's camps. An exception is only possible if it is a very minor case and there is no danger of further offences.
The provision protects children and particularly vulnerable persons from repeated assaults by persons in positions of trust.
N. 1 The popular initiative «Paedophiles should no longer be allowed to work with children» was submitted on 4 May 2011 with 111,391 valid signatures (BBl 2012 8819). The initiative was preceded by a broad societal debate about protecting minors from sexual abuse, triggered by several high-profile cases of sexual offences committed by persons in positions of trust.
N. 2 In its message of 10 October 2012, the Federal Council recommended rejecting the initiative without a counter-proposal (BBl 2012 8819, 8822). It particularly criticised the lack of a proportionality assessment and the unclear definition of the activities concerned. Parliament followed this recommendation with 120 to 62 votes in the National Council and 31 to 11 votes in the Council of States (AB NR 2013 443 ff.).
N. 3 On 18 May 2014, the people and cantons accepted the initiative with 63.5% yes votes and a majority in all cantons. The high level of approval reflected the population's pronounced need to protect minors. Implementation took place through the revision of the Criminal Code on 1 January 2019 (AS 2018 2855).
N. 4 Art. 123c BV is systematically classified under the transitional provisions for the total revision of the Federal Constitution, but materially belongs to the judicial provisions. The provision is closely related to → Art. 123b BV (imprescriptibility), which also aims to strengthen the protection of children from sexual offences.
N. 5 The provision breaches several fundamental constitutional principles: it restricts → Art. 27 BV (economic freedom) and → Art. 10 BV (personal freedom). The constitutional automatism conflicts with the principle of proportionality (→ Art. 5 para. 2 BV) and the principle of individual case assessment by judges (→ Art. 32 para. 1 BV).
N. 6 At the legislative level, the constitutional provision was primarily implemented in Art. 67 para. 2bis, 3 and 4bis CC. The implementation had to balance the constitutional automatism with international law requirements (→ Art. 8 ECHR).
N. 7Triggering offence: The provision covers persons who «are convicted of impairing the sexual integrity of a child or dependent person». Göksu takes the position that consumption of child pornography is also covered, as the consumer is «within the scope of the prohibition» (Göksu, BSK BV, Art. 123c N. 8). This is consistent with BGE 149 IV 161, which confirms a broad scope of application.
N. 8Concept of child: According to prevailing doctrine, children are persons under 16 years of age, based on the age of protection in sexual criminal law (→ Art. 187 CC). The French version («mineur») suggests minors under 18 years of age, which leads to interpretation problems (Göksu, BSK BV, Art. 123c N. 11).
N. 9Dependent person: This concept covers persons in a special dependency relationship, for example due to disability, illness or a care relationship. The exact delimitation remains controversial in doctrine and case law.
N. 10Automatism of the prohibition: The Constitution mandatorily orders a «definitive» prohibition, without discretion for the courts. This automatism was implemented by the legislature in Art. 67 para. 2bis CC as a «lifelong» activity prohibition, whereby a review is possible after ten years (Art. 67c para. 6 CC).
N. 11Scope of prohibited activities: Professional and non-professional activities with minors or other particularly vulnerable persons are covered. The Federal Council interprets this restrictively: only activities «with» minors are covered, not those where «contact is merely possible» (Göksu, BSK BV, Art. 123c N. 25, referring to the message). Göksu criticises that the French text is more broadly conceived and covers «any activity that enables contact with children».
N. 12Proportionality reservation: The legislature has created an exception provision for «particularly minor cases» in Art. 67 para. 4bis CC. According to BGE 149 IV 161 E. 2.5.1, this is interpreted extremely restrictively: the lifelong activity prohibition should remain the rule.
N. 13Direct applicability: A central point of contention concerns the immediate applicability of the constitutional provision. Göksu maintains that the provision is «sufficiently determined to be directly applied, albeit within a limited framework» (Göksu, BSK BV, Art. 123c N. 2). The Federal Council, however, argued that the provision «will not manage without implementation at the legislative level» (BBl 2012 8819, 8838).
N. 14Scope of the activity prohibition: The extent of the activities covered is controversially discussed. While a narrow interpretation covers only direct care activities, others advocate for a broad interpretation that includes any possible contact with minors. Case law tends towards the narrow interpretation (VGer ZH, VB.2014.00008).
N. 15Proportionality and international law: The compatibility of the automatic lifelong prohibition with the principle of proportionality and the ECHR remains controversial. The introduction of the review possibility after ten years (Art. 67c para. 6 CC) mitigates these concerns but does not fully resolve them.
N. 16 When applying Art. 123c BV, it must first be examined whether a triggering offence exists. Case law interprets the covered offences broadly, but tends to exclude pure possession offences without reference to concrete victims (VGer ZH, VB.2014.00008).
N. 17 The exception provision of Art. 67 para. 4bis CC must be applied extremely cautiously. Only where there is a cumulative presence of a «particularly minor case» and no risk of recidivism can the activity prohibition be waived. Mere first-time offender status is insufficient (BGE 149 IV 161).
N. 18 For the defence, it is recommended to set out the concrete professional implications of the activity prohibition at an early stage. In minor cases without a paedophilic background, the requirements of the exception provision must be substantiated in detail. Cantonal case law shows an increasing willingness to deviate from the rigid rule in clear cases.
#Lifelong Prohibition from Activities and Exception Provision
BGE 149 IV 161 E. 2.5.1-2.6 of 3 April 2023
The central leading decision on the requirements for the exception provision of Art. 67 para. 4bis StGB in implementing Art. 123c BV. The Federal Supreme Court specifies the restrictive application of the exception provision and emphasises the automatism of the lifelong prohibition from activities as a constitutional rule.
«Refraining from ordering a prohibition from activities under Art. 67 paras. 3 and 4 StGB is permissible according to the wording of Art. 67 para. 4bis StGB under two cumulative conditions: On the one hand, it must be a 'particularly minor case', on the other hand, the prohibition must not be necessary to prevent the perpetrator from committing further criminal offences. From the word 'exceptionally' it follows that the provision is to be applied restrictively. The mandatory lifelong prohibition from activities should be the rule.»
Judgment 6B_1027/2021 of 5 June 2023
The implementation of Art. 123c BV was carried out with the aim of implementing the constitutional automatism as far as possible. The Federal Supreme Court confirms the narrow interpretation of the exception provision in cases of multiple pornography.
«Nevertheless, it can be taken into account in individual cases whether the perpetrator committed the sexual offence in the exercise of his professional or extra-professional activity, as this increases the danger situation.»
Judgment 2A.430/2006 of 6 February 2007
Historically significant decision on book price maintenance, which shows that the Federal Supreme Court considers cultural policy aspects in constitutional balancing, albeit without direct reference to Art. 123c BV, which was only introduced in 2014.
VB.2014.00008 (Administrative Court of Zurich) of 28 May 2014
First interpretation of the newly entered into force Art. 123c BV in the context of professional prohibitions from activities. The court establishes that the possession of pornographic materials by a teacher does not automatically constitute a trigger offence within the meaning of Art. 123c BV.
«The appellant's misconduct does not constitute trigger offences within the meaning of Art. 123c BV. By storing private data in large quantities in general and pornographic images in particular, the appellant violated his professional duties, but the welfare or sexual integrity of the school children was not affected.»
SB230105 (Higher Court of Zurich) of 21 November 2023
Current cantonal case law on the application of Art. 67 para. 3 lit. b StGB for sexual acts with children. The court applies a strict standard and emphasises the protection of sexual integrity as an important legal interest.
«A strict standard must be applied to this offence, as an important legal interest is violated with sexual integrity and self-determination. The court must classify the perpetrator's culpability as particularly minor under an overall assessment of the act and perpetrator components.»
Judgment 6B_25/2024 of 7 May 2025
Confirmation of the restrictive handling of the exception provision. The Federal Supreme Court refers to the message on the implementation of Art. 123c BV and emphasises the irrefutable presumption in cases of serious trigger offences.
«The provision of Art. 67 para. 4bis StGB is to be applied restrictively and only to be applied to certain trigger offences. The exception provision is intended to prevent shocking violations of the principle of proportionality.»
SB240469 (Higher Court of Zurich) of 30 June 2025
Latest cantonal case law on the foundations of the exception provision under Art. 67 para. 4bis StGB in cases of multiple hard pornography. The exception provision is understood as ultima ratio.
«The exception provision is intended to prevent shocking violations of the principle of proportionality, because the court would have to mandatorily order a lifelong prohibition from activities in particularly minor cases.»
Case law on Art. 123c BV has been continuously developed since its entry into force on 18 May 2014. The Federal Supreme Court in BGE 149 IV 161 took a comprehensive position on the exception provisions for the first time and thereby emphasised the constitutional automatism. Cantonal case law consistently follows the Federal Supreme Court's restrictive approach and applies the exception provision only in clear trivial cases that have no connection to paedophilia.