Fourteen Genevan lawyers have publicly criticized what they see as repeated abuses of power by police investigators, tolerated by the Public Prosecutor's Office. They cite instances of excessive intrusion into the private lives of political activists, drawing parallels to past national scandals involving extensive data collection.
The lawyers highlight the cases of Extinction Rebellion activists investigated for painting unauthorized bike lanes and the "Jérémy" case involving alleged sabotage of Holcim construction equipment. These cases reveal what they describe as wide-ranging investigations that included profiling suspects’ finances, social connections, and even vacation activities.
The lawyers contest the use of personal data obtained through investigations, arguing that it blurs the lines between crime prevention and political opposition surveillance. They criticize the existing legislation as vague and inadequate to protect privacy, calling for clearer guidelines and stronger oversight mechanisms.
The lawyers are calling for a more precise definition of the circumstances that justify surveillance measures, citing the European Court of Human Rights. A corresponding question has been raised in the Grand Council by a Green Party member, though the Council of State hasn't yet responded.