PCPA proposal still before voters
The federal referendum information confirms that the amendment passed by Parliament on 19 December 2025 is subject to a referendum. The vote has not taken place. Existing law must be distinguished from the additional possibilities the proposal would introduce.
The SECO dossier explains exports to certain partner states involved in conflicts, exceptional departures from criteria and changes to non-re-export assurances. It states that international obligations would continue to apply. The PCP criticises the greater political discretion, without claiming that the proposal would abolish every rule.
The destination must remain traceable
For the PCP, the initial licence is not enough. Final destination, subsequent transfers and possible use must remain central to scrutiny. A chain of transactions can move equipment away from the circumstances assessed when it was sold. Public responsibility cannot end at the first border.
The Party calls for credible follow-up guarantees, verification resources and effective consequences when commitments are broken. Published information should enable democratic scrutiny without disclosing protected operational data. Debate should address the actual criteria, risks considered and decisions taken. General assurances cannot substitute for examining how control would work in a particular chain of transfers.
Address the industrial argument
The Federal Council and Parliament present reciprocal access to supply chains as a security reason for the amendment. The PCP takes the jobs, skills and productive capabilities concerned seriously. It rejects the assumption that their future must depend on a permanent expansion of markets for war material.
Industrial policy should prepare diversification into useful civilian production, including railway equipment, energy infrastructure, precision instruments and maintenance. That requires orders, research, training and workers’ participation. Conversion does not mean abandoning production sites. It must be funded and planned with the people who work there, including transition periods and protection for employment.
Security through prevention
The PCP supports a Swiss policy that maintains diplomatic relations, promotes peaceful settlement and avoids encouraging escalation. Neutrality must not become a formula used to justify commercial choices already made. Each decision should be explainable through its foreseeable consequences for security and for people affected by conflict.
The Party calls for a no vote on 29 November and for public work on industrial diversification, employment protection and effective export scrutiny. Its opposition concerns the proposal before voters. It neither anticipates the result of the referendum nor alleges that authorities would abandon all their international obligations. A policy for peace needs both firm controls and a credible productive future for the workforce.
Documents and sources
The cited documents provide the facts and provisions examined. Political judgments and proposals expressed in this article are those of the PCP.