![\"container](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ch\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/421536172_highres.jpg\")
<\/p>\n <\/p>\n
From Switzerland to the world: containers at the Port of Switzerland on the Rhine river in Basel. <\/p>\n
Gaetan Bally \/ Keystone <\/p>\n
As global trade rules fray, countries are scrambling to shore up export markets and diversify partners. For highly globalised, export-dependent Switzerland, there could be an added complication: the ballot box.\n<\/p>\n
This content was published on <\/p>\n
February 20, 2026 – 09:00\n<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ch\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/domhnall-o-sullivan-profileImage-43148785.png\")
<\/p>\n
\n As part of the democracy team, I report on the dynamic relationship between citizens and their institutions in Switzerland and abroad.
\nBorn in Ireland, I have a BA in European Studies and MA in International Relations. I’ve been at SWI swissinfo.ch since 2017. <\/p>\n
The clock is ticking. By March 31, Swiss authorities hope to finalise a deal with Washington capping US tariffs at 15%. Yet even if they meet the deadline, and parliament signs off on the agreement, a delay looms \u2013 Swiss voters could yet force a referendum. Given public hostility<\/a> to US President Donald Trump and his tariffs, and the razor-thin acceptance of a trade deal with Indonesia in 2021, approval would be far from certain.<\/p>\n Whether it will come to a ballot remains unclear. C\u00e9dric Wermuth, the leader of the left-wing Social Democrats, told the Neue Z\u00fcrcher Zeitung in January that he would consider launching a referendum \u2013 which requires 50,000 signatures \u2013 \u201cif necessary\u201d. But for now, with no final agreement on the table, and US politics volatile, opposition is largely rhetorical.<\/p>\n Yet what is clear is that the US talks are just one of several trade fronts facing scrutiny and a possible vote in Switzerland in the near future. A deal with South American trade bloc Mercosur awaits ratification; an updated agreement with China is also in the works. At a time of geopolitical shifts and fragmenting trade rules, is popular involvement a source of legitimacy, or a brake on economic agility?<\/p>\n Legal shortcut<\/p>\n For years, Swiss authorities leaned towards speed. Labelling trade deals as \u201cstandard agreements\u201d, they even managed to avoid public votes altogether. Since such deals all tend to be similar in aim and design \u2013 regardless of the trade partner \u2013 they need not be subject to an \u201coptional referendum\u201d, the government argued. Parliament approved them; citizens didn\u2019t.<\/p>\n The practice endured, despite the fact that it \u201cinfringed the constitution\u201d, says Louis Gebistorf from the Centre for Democracy Studies Aarau. There was little public outcry over what many saw as a legal technicality, while the government defended the approach with arguments of efficiency and predictability. Parliamentary approval, Gebistorf says, still gave a \u201crelatively high\u201d degree of democratic legitimacy.<\/p>\n Giving voters the option<\/p>\n Not everybody was convinced. In 2014, a trade deal with China sparked debates about human rights as well as questions about public involvement in ratification. And a few years later, when the government moved to codify the \u201cstandard agreement\u201d approach in law, pushback from political and civil society groups led to a U-turn. Ever since, all new trade deals have been open to being challenged to referendum \u2013 a \u201cpositive development from a democratic point of view\u201d, says Gebistorf.<\/p>\n The shift has also made Switzerland an outlier. Elsewhere, public involvement in trade policy is mostly confined to lobbying, protesting, or passively accepting executive \u2013 or even corrupt \u2013 decisions. In a rare case when direct democracy did get involved at the EU level, it failed: a 2014 European Citizens\u2019 Initiative against EU deals with the US and Canada collected three million signatures before being rejected on technical grounds.<\/p>\n >> Read more about how direct democracy is having problems at the European level in our recent analysis:<\/p>\n \n More<\/p>\n More <\/p>\n Digital Democracy\n <\/p>\n Why EU direct democracy has struggled to take off <\/p>\n This content was published on <\/p>\n Feb 5, 2026 <\/p>\n Well over a decade after its launch, the EU\u2019s tool for citizen participation has failed to gain traction, especially set against the wide popular rights enjoyed in Switzerland. Why? <\/p>\n <\/p>\n Read more: Why EU direct democracy has struggled to take off The referendum\u2019s practical impact on Swiss trade policy is more nuanced. Groups focused on sustainability or human rights welcome the broadened participation possibility, says Isolda Agazzi of Alliance Sud, an umbrella organisation for Swiss aid NGOs. Just one deal \u2013 the EFTA-Indonesia free trade agreement in 2021 \u2013 has actually been taken to a public vote; but the mere possibility of a referendum challenge has made authorities more attentive to civil society concerns, she says.<\/p>\n The tight outcome of the Indonesia vote \u2013 51.6% approved it \u2013 was also a clear sign that public acceptance can\u2019t be taken for granted, Agazzi adds.<\/p>\n Negotiated behind closed doors<\/p>\n Another question is whether the prospect of voter ratification damages the Swiss negotiating position. Charlotte Sieber-Gasser, a researcher at Geneva\u2019s Graduate Institute, argues such fears are overstated. According to her, Swiss officials working on the Indonesia deal even said the prospect of a referendum strengthened their hand, giving them leverage to secure environmental concessions. The same dynamic applies in ongoing talks with China, where the Swiss are pushing for a human rights chapter in an updated agreement, she adds.<\/p>\n Rather, Sieber-Gasser has other democratic concerns. The big issue is that while parliament and voters can sign off on trade deals, their involvement amounts more to a veto option rather than to real participation, she reckons. They can say yes or no, but they can\u2019t make substantial changes to agreements that are largely hammered out behind closed doors before being presented as a final \u2013 and inevitable \u2013 package.<\/p>\n The decisive moment comes early on, when officials draft the negotiating mandate, Sieber-Gasser explains. And as long as politicians, civil society and voters aren\u2019t more involved at this early stage, the final seal of approval is \u201cwindow dressing\u201d. Meanwhile, if citizens feel pressure to accept deals that they don\u2019t really like, this can damage trust in the government, she says \u2013 or even \u201chollow out democratic rights\u201d.<\/p>\n >> How do referendums and people\u2019s initiatives in Switzerland actually work? Read and watch more in our explainer:<\/p>\n \n More<\/p>\n More <\/p>\n Swiss democracy\n <\/p>\n How Swiss direct democracy works <\/p>\n This content was published on <\/p>\n Mar 31, 2025 <\/p>\n What do direct democratic tools like popular initiatives and referendums really entail? And how has this unique system evolved over time?\u00a0 <\/p>\n
\n More from this author <\/a><\/p>\n
\n English Department <\/a><\/p>\n![\"tractor](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ch\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/598555381_highres.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
\n <\/a><\/p>\n![\"vote\"](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ch\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/How-Switzerlands-political-system-of-Direct-Democracy-works.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
![\"Man](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ch\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/423663883_highres.jpg\")
<\/p>\n