Last October, the Swiss Federal Council published a preliminary draft of the ‘Federal Act on Communication Platforms and Search Engines’ and opened it for consultation. According to the accompanying explanatory report, the draft is designed to align closely with the European Union’s Digital Services Act (DSA). In the analysis below, we explore the extent of this alignment and provide a high‑level overview of whether compliance with the DSA will, in practice, translate into compliance with the emerging Swiss framework.
| DSA Topic | Swiss draft provision (VE‑KomPG)* | If you comply with the DSA will you be in compliance with the Swiss law? |
| Scope | Art. 2: Applies only to large communication platforms and large search engines meeting Swiss user‑thresholds. | 🟨DSA is broader – not all organisations that fall within the scope of the DSA need to comply with the Swiss law |
| Liability of intermediary service providers | No equivalent regime. | ⚪ Not applicable. |
| Point of contact | Art. 21-22: Must designate an easily accessible contact point reachable in a Swiss official language; cannot rely solely on automated systems. | 🟩 Yes provided there is compliance with Swiss language and communication‑method requirements. |
| Legal representatives | Art. 23: Must appoint a representative located in Switzerland and provide details to Swiss OFCOM. | 🟥 No – Swiss law requires a Swiss‑based representative. |
| Terms & conditions – transparency obligations | Art. 13: T&Cs must include reporting procedures, complaint mechanisms, restrictive‑measure details, be available in DE/FR/IT, be easy to understand and summary must be provided. | 🟥 No – there is overlap but both the Swiss law and the DSA have additional different mandatory requirements. |
| Transparency reports | Art. 19: Annual report to Swiss OFCOM with specified data and information, with publication and ongoing updating obligations. | 🟥 No – while the transparency requirements generally align, there are different requirements. |
| Notice & action mechanisms | Art. 4 – 5, 14: Detailed Swiss reporting process; includes a list of illegal content, user notification rules, and procedural requirements. | 🟥 No – the Swiss obligations are based on the DSA but are not identical. For example, the Swiss law introduces a priority concept for “trusted reporters”. |
| Obligation to state reasons for restrictions | Art. 6, 14: An obligation to notify users affected by restrictive measures and an obligation of care. Includes Swiss language requirements. | 🟩 Yes provided there is compliance with language requirements. DSA obligations are broader in scope. |
| Exclusion for micro and small enterprises | No equivalent regime. | ⚪ Not applicable. |
| Internal complaints & out‑of‑court dispute resolution | Art. 7-12, 14: Two‑stage mechanism for complaints; Swiss‑approved dispute bodies, deadlines, and cost rules; Swiss OFCOM oversight. | 🟥 No – Swiss regime is similar but has Swiss specific requirements. |
| Online interface design and organisation | No equivalent regime. | ⚪ Not applicable. |
| Advertising on online platforms | Art. 15,17: requirements for mandatory transparency | 🟩 Yes – DSA obligations are broader in scope. |
| Recommender Systems | Art. 18: requirements for transparency and non‑profiling option | 🟩 Yes |
| Online protection of minors | No equivalent regime. | ⚪ Not applicable. |
| Traceability of traders | No equivalent regime. | ⚪ Not applicable. |
| Compliance by design | No equivalent regime. | ⚪ Not applicable. |
| Right to information | No equivalent regime. | ⚪ Not applicable. |
| Additional obligations for providers of very large platforms | No equivalent regime. | ⚪ Not applicable. |
| Risk assessment | Art. 20: Annual risk assessment focusing on Swiss systemic risks; reporting to Swiss OFCOM and publication required. | 🟨 Maybe – the DSA provisions are currently more detailed. Additional specification on the Swiss requirements is anticipated through supplemental ordinance(s). |
| Mitigation of risks | No equivalent regime. | ⚪ Not applicable. |
| Crisis response mechanism | No equivalent regime. | ⚪ Not applicable. |
| Independent audit | Art. 24-25: Annual evaluation by Swiss OFCOM‑approved evaluators; must publish evaluation and an action‑plan report. | 🟩 Yes, the auditor can be same as a DSA auditor provided they are approved by Swiss OFCOM. However, the audit will be re compliance with the Swiss law. |
| Advertising archive | Art. 16: Obligations to maintain a public advertising archive similar to DSA. | 🟩 Yes |
| Data access for researchers | Art. 26: Includes access for civil society organisations; Swiss OFCOM approves applications and compels disclosure. | 🟥 No – Swiss scope is broader and includes civil society actors. |
| Compliance function | No equivalent regime. | ⚪ Not applicable. |
| Supervision, enforcement & sanctions | Art. 27-39: Swiss OFCOM supervises; may order access restrictions; fine levels and procedures differ to DSA. | 🟥 No |
| Due Diligence obligations | No equivalent regime. | ⚪ Not applicable. |
| Crisis protocol | No equivalent regime. | ⚪ Not applicable. |
*Please note that this draft is still subject to revision and further specification through supplemental ordinance(s).
For further background, see our earlier article on Switzerland’s new law on communication platforms and search engines.
