Published on 1 February 2026

The relationship between international law and national law

An international norm approved by Switzerland automatically becomes part of Swiss law. In the hierarchy of legal norms, in principle international law takes precedence over national law. The Federal Constitution requires the Confederation and the cantons to comply with international law.

Monistic system

Once approved by Switzerland, an international legal norm becomes an integral part of Swiss law and must be applied by and complied with by all state organs. This is the distinctive feature of a monist system. In contrast to what would happen in a dualist system, there is no need to pass additional legislation, for example a specific act of parliament, for an international legal instrument to become part of Swiss law. An international legal provision which is binding upon Switzerland is automatically valid under national law.

This is why the Federal Council checks, prior to ratifying an international legal instrument, that its provisions comply with national law. If there is domestic political opposition to implementing certain provisions, Switzerland can, in principle, make a reservation.

The direct applicability of the norms of international law

The norms of international law do not all create rights and obligations directly. It may occasionally be necessary to adapt and define them. International law that is not directly applicable is most often of a programmatic nature, leaving its implementation to the national legislator.

The Federal Court has developed criteria for determining whether a provision of international law is directly applicable (see Federal Court Decision 124 III 90 or 129 II 249, p. 257):

The provision must relate to the rights and obligations of the individual
The provision must be justiciable, i.e. sufficiently concrete and clear to be applied to a specific legal case by an authority or court.
The provision must be aimed at the authorities responsible for applying the law and not at legislatures

Precedence of international law over national law

According to the Federal Constitution, the Confederation and the cantons must respect international law. This fundamental primacy of international law arises from the obligation to fulfill treaties in good faith. However, the Federal Constitution does not derive absolute primacy of international law.

In its jurisprudence, the Federal Supreme Court confirms the principle of the primacy of international law over national law. For the very few cases in which conflicts between norms of international law and national law cannot be resolved by interpretation, the Federal Supreme Court provides an exception: If Parliament knowingly enacted a law that violates international law, the law prevails (BGE 99 Ib 39, the so-called "Schubert practice"). However, as a counter-exception, international human rights guarantees, such as those enshrined in the ECHR, always take precedence over federal law (BGE 125 II 417, the so-called "PKK practice"). The Federal Supreme Court has also applied this practice in individual cases to obligations similar to human rights or those related to freedom of movement (BGE 133 V 36, 148 II 169).

Documents

1 February 2026