Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters (Switzerland) Regulations
In ForceCTH
Jurisdiction
Commonwealth
Act Number
7 of 1994
Collection
legislative instrument
Plain English Summary
5/10 complexity
What these Regulations do (mechanically)
These Regulations make the Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters Act 1987 apply to Switzerland, but only to the extent necessary to implement the Treaty between Australia and Switzerland on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters (the Treaty). The English text of the Treaty is included as the Schedule to the Regulations (Regulation 4; Schedule). They commence on 31 July 1994 (Regulation 2) and repeal the previous Swiss mutual assistance regulations (Regulation 5).
What the Treaty establishes (key operational features)
Mutual assistance: Each country will help the other with criminal investigations and proceedings, including taking testimony, producing and preserving documents or material, locating persons, search and seizure, tracing/freezing/confiscating proceeds of crime, making persons available to give evidence, and service of documents (Schedule, Article 1).
Limits on use: Information or material supplied may not be used for purposes outside the Treaty without the Requested State’s prior consent, and access to material is restricted to those affected, their lawyers or victims except with consent (Article 4).
Confidentiality: Both States must use their best endeavours to meet confidentiality requests attached to assistance (Article 5).
Central coordination: Each State appoints a Central Office to receive and process requests and to communicate directly (Article 6). For Australia the Attorney‑General’s Department is the Central Office unless changed (Article 6(1)).
The Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters (Switzerland) Regulations 1994 apply the Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters Act 1987 (the Act) to Switzerland subject to the limitations, conditions, exceptions and qualifications necessary to give effect to the Treaty between Australia and Switzerland on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters done at Berne on 25 November 1991 (s 4(1)). A full English text of the Treaty is set out in the Schedule. The Regulations repeal the earlier Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters (Swiss Confederation) Regulations 1988 (s 5) and commenced on 31 July 1994.
At its core the Treaty establishes a comprehensive bilateral framework for the provision of mutual legal assistance in criminal matters. Article 1(1) obliges the Contracting Parties to grant each other assistance in investigations or proceedings in respect of offences the punishment of which falls or would fall within the jurisdiction of the judicial authorities of the Requesting State. Article 1(2) enumerates the forms of assistance that may be provided: taking of testimony and statements of persons; production, preservation and handing over of documents or material; location and identification of persons; execution of requests for search and seizure as well as tracing, freezing, confiscating and returning the proceeds or profits of crime; making persons available to give evidence or to assist in investigations; service of documents; and any other assistance consistent with the objects of the Treaty that is mutually acceptable.
The Treaty is explicit about what it does not do. Article 1(3) states that assistance shall not include extradition or the enforcement or execution of final criminal judgements except to the extent permitted by the law of the Requested State and the Treaty itself. This carve-out is repeated in the Regulations' application clause, ensuring that the Act is modified to the extent necessary to respect this boundary.
Current sections
Direct links to the current provisions in Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters (Switzerland) Regulations.
1
Official source available
Zoe has indexed the source text for search and analysis. Use the official register for the original document and download formats.
Sourced from the Federal Register of Legislation (legislation.gov.au), CC BY 4.0.
Contents and form of requests: Requests must identify the requesting authority, describe the offence and the assistance sought, state confidentiality needs, and, where feasible, include witness details, descriptions of documents sought, and information on fees/expenses for witnesses (Article 7). Documents sent by Switzerland must be in or translated into English; Australian documents must be in or translated into an official language of Switzerland specified by Switzerland (Article 7(3)).
Discretion and grounds for refusal: The Requested State can refuse assistance on enumerated grounds (political or military offences, fiscal offences, double jeopardy/pardon/sentence served, statute of limitations/immunity under its law, requests made for discriminatory prosecution, or where assistance would seriously impair sovereignty/security/public order/essential interests) and may consider resource burden and safety implications when deciding (Article 2). Assistance involving compulsory measures can be refused where the equivalent act would not be an offence in the Requested State (Article 3).
Procedure and timing: The Requested State applies its own law and procedures in carrying out requests, shall inform the Requesting State promptly of delays or refusals and may impose conditions on assistance (Article 8). Material needed for domestic proceedings may be supplied as certified copies pending completion of those proceedings (Article 8(4)).
Return and third‑party claims: Documents provided should be returned on request after completion of proceedings; third‑party claims in the Requested State can delay handover (Article 9).
Witnesses and prisoners: The Treaty sets rules for making prisoners or other persons available to give evidence (Articles 13–15), including custody arrangements, safe conduct from prosecution for pre-departure acts while present as a witness, and entitlement to fees and expenses for witnesses (Articles 13, 14, 15).
Search, seizure and proceeds of crime: The Requested State will, subject to its law, carry out tracing, freezing, confiscation and may hand over proceeds to victims or entitled parties on application (Article 16).
Costs: The Requested State meets the costs of fulfilling requests except that the Requesting State must meet specified expenses such as conveying and custody costs for persons, escort costs, and any exceptional third‑party costs required by the Requested State (Article 19).
Who pays, who decides, and what behaviour changes
Who pays: The Requested State ordinarily bears the cost of carrying out requests; the Requesting State pays transport, custody and related fees for persons it requests be conveyed, escorting officers’ expenses, and any exceptional third‑party costs the Requested State requires (Article 19).
Who decides: The Central Offices coordinate and transmit requests (Article 6). The Requested State’s authorities apply their own law in carrying out requests and have explicit discretion to refuse or impose conditions under the Treaty (Articles 2, 3, 8). Domestic courts and agencies in the Requested State decide on compulsory measures and on timely certification/copies for ongoing proceedings (Articles 8, 12).
Behaviour changes: Relevant Australian and Swiss agencies will (1) prepare and translate documents to the language requirements (Article 7(3)); (2) route requests through the Central Offices (Article 6); (3) budget for and, where necessary, request payments for costs specified in Article 19; (4) consider confidentiality requests and conditions imposed by the other State (Articles 4–5); and (5) adapt to procedural requirements such as advance notice for service of documents and handling of prisoners or witnesses (Articles 17, 13–15).
Implementation trade‑offs, compliance burdens and risks (source‑grounded testing of purpose claims)
Incentives and costs: The Treaty’s cooperation reduces transaction costs for cross‑border evidence gathering by providing a formal channel and predictable list of assistance types (Article 1, Article 6). Those benefits create recurring administrative tasks: translation of documents (Article 7(3)), preparing detailed requests (Article 7), and maintaining Central Office functions (Article 6). Agencies will bear these compliance costs.
Discretion and implementation risk: The Requested State retains significant discretion to refuse assistance on enumerated substantive and public‑interest grounds (Article 2), to refuse compulsory measures when the equivalent conduct is not an offence domestically (Article 3), and to impose conditions (Article 8(8)). Those discretions mean outcomes can vary with domestic law and resource constraints, and the Requesting State may face delays or partial compliance (Article 8(5), Article 8(7)).
Resource burden and opportunity cost: The Treaty anticipates that the Requested State may refuse assistance if fulfilment would impose an excessive burden on its resources (Article 2(2)). Where assistance is accepted, the Requested State normally meets the ordinary costs, but exceptional or person‑conveyance costs fall on the Requesting State (Article 19). That shifts some direct monetary burden to the requesting jurisdiction for person movements.
Effects on private parties and businesses: The Treaty authorises seizure, production and handing over of documents and material, and tracing/freezing/confiscation of proceeds (Article 1(2)(b),(d); Article 16). That permits law enforcement to seek corporate or individual records held in the other State, subject to domestic law and refusal grounds — a potential compliance and reputational cost for businesses and individuals who must respond to requests or have assets traced/frozen.
Confidentiality and use limits: The Requested State can limit use and further disclosure of material supplied (Article 4), which reduces the risk that information is used for unrelated purposes but can constrain the Requesting State’s downstream options for using material and sharing it with third parties (Article 4(1)–(2)).
Rights and protections for individuals: The Treaty preserves relevant testimonial privileges under either State’s law (Article 11) and provides safe conduct and limits on prosecution for persons made available to give evidence (Article 15), which affects individual willingness to comply and the practical use of witness transfer.
Net practical effect (summary statement)
Mechanically, the Regulations attach the Mutual Assistance Act to Switzerland according to the detailed Treaty terms in the Schedule, create a predictable framework for cross‑border criminal evidence and enforcement cooperation, allocate most routine costs to the Requested State with specific cost allocations to the Requesting State, and preserve broad discretion for the Requested State to refuse or condition assistance under enumerated grounds. The rules create administrative and translation burdens for agencies, enable cross‑border access to documents and freezing of assets subject to domestic law and refusal grounds, and set protections and expense entitlements for persons asked to give evidence.
Refusal of assistance is addressed in Article 2. Assistance may be refused (subject to the law of the Requested State) on six enumerated grounds: where the offence is regarded as a political offence or an offence only under military law; where the request concerns a fiscal offence; where the offender has been finally acquitted, pardoned or has served the sentence; where the person would be immune by reason of lapse of time under the law of the Requested State; where there are substantial grounds for believing the request is made to facilitate prosecution on discriminatory grounds (race, sex, religion, nationality or political opinions); or where the Requested State considers that granting the request would seriously impair its sovereignty, security, public order or other essential interests. Article 2(2) elaborates that essential interests may include prejudice to an ongoing investigation, danger to any person, or the imposition of an excessive burden on resources.
Compulsory measures attract an additional dual-criminality filter. Article 3(1) permits refusal where the acts or omissions, if committed in the Requested State in similar circumstances, would not be punishable under its laws. This does not apply, however, where the assistance is directed to establishing the innocence of a person.
Once assistance is granted, strict controls govern subsequent use. Article 4(1) prohibits the Requesting State from using information or material for any purpose for which assistance would not have been granted under the Treaty without the prior consent of the Requested State. Article 4(2) limits the right to examine such material to those affected by the request, their legal representatives or victims, again absent prior consent.
Confidentiality obligations are reciprocal. Article 5 requires each State to use its best endeavours to observe the standard of confidentiality requested by the other, both in carrying out the request and in protecting material once received.
Institutional machinery is created by Article 6. Each Party must maintain a Central Office. For Australia this is the Attorney-General’s Department in Canberra (until another authority is designated); for Switzerland it is the Federal Office for Police Matters of the Federal Department of Justice and Police in Berne. All requests must travel through the Central Offices, which are authorised to communicate directly with each other and to arrange prompt execution by competent authorities.
The content and form of requests are prescribed in exhaustive detail by Article 7. Mandatory elements include the identity of the competent authority, the subject matter and nature of the investigation or proceeding, a description of the essential acts or omissions (including the applicable law), the purpose of the request, any particular procedures requested, identifying particulars of the person under investigation, and any confidentiality requirements. Optional but recommended elements cover witness details, whether sworn evidence is required, descriptions of documents, fees and allowances, and precise descriptions of premises to be searched. Language requirements are strict: Swiss requests to Australia must be in English; Australian requests to Switzerland must be in an official Swiss language specified by Switzerland. Incomplete requests may be supplemented (Article 7(4)).
Execution of requests is governed by Article 8. The Requested State applies its own law as it would to a comparable domestic matter, but must endeavour to follow any particular procedures specified by the Requesting State where its law permits. Delivery of the response must occur as soon as practicable. Postponement is allowed if the material is required for domestic proceedings, although certified copies must be supplied in the interim. The Requested State must notify the Requesting State of likely significant delays and of any decision to refuse a request in whole or in part, together with reasons. Before refusing, the Requested State must consider whether conditional assistance can be offered, and the Requesting State must comply with any conditions imposed.
Return of documents and material is mandatory under Article 9. Upon completion of proceedings the Requesting State must return anything supplied if requested. Third-party claims asserted before handover bind the Requesting State to return the items as soon as possible after proceedings conclude.
Evidentiary provisions occupy Articles 10–12. “Evidence” expressly includes production of documents or material (Article 10(1)). Persons to whom the foreign proceedings relate, the relevant authority and legal representatives may be present and put questions during the taking of evidence in the Requested State if that would prevent inadmissibility in the Requesting State or would otherwise facilitate the request (Article 10(2)). A person required to give evidence may decline if they possess a right to refuse under the law of either State; where the right arises under the law of the Requesting State the Requested State relies on a certificate from the Central Office of the Requesting State (Article 11). Certification of documents is not required unless specifically requested, in which case it must follow the form sought provided it is consistent with the law of the Requested State (Article 12).
Transfer of prisoners is regulated by Article 13. A prisoner in the Requested State may be transferred to the Requesting State to give evidence or assist in investigations with the prisoner’s consent. Transfer may be delayed if the prisoner’s presence is required domestically. The Requesting State must keep the prisoner in custody, return the prisoner at the conclusion of the matter (or earlier if no longer required), and treat time spent in its custody as time served in the Requested State. If the sentence expires while abroad, the former prisoner becomes entitled to the same fees and expenses as a voluntary witness under Article 14. A prisoner who withholds consent cannot be penalised or subjected to coercive measures.
Voluntary witnesses and experts fall under Article 14. A person in the Requested State (other than a party to the proceedings) may be summoned or requested to appear or assist. The Requested State must seek their consent and communicate the answer. The person may require advance of funds for fees, allowances and expenses. Non-compliance with a summons does not expose the person to penalty or coercive measures even if the summons states otherwise.
Safe-conduct protections are conferred by Article 15. A person transferred or summoned under Articles 13 or 14 may not be prosecuted, arrested or subjected to civil suit in the Requesting State for any act or omission preceding their departure from the Requested State, nor required to give evidence in proceedings other than those to which the request relates. These immunities lapse if the person, not being a prisoner, remains in the Requesting State more than thirty days after being notified that their presence is no longer required. Evidence given cannot found prosecution except for perjury.
Search, seizure and proceeds of crime are dealt with in Article 16. The Requested State must, subject to its law, execute requests for search and seizure and for tracing, freezing, confiscating or returning proceeds or profits of crime. In urgent cases interim measures must be taken to preserve the status quo. Material or proceeds may be handed over to the Requesting State for remission to victims or other entitled parties.
Service of documents is regulated by Article 17. The Requested State must effect service of any document required by the law of the Requesting State in connection with an investigation or proceeding. Requests must ordinarily be made at least thirty days before any required personal appearance, although this period may be waived in urgent cases.
Police-to-police cooperation is separately authorised by Article 18. To the extent permitted by domestic law, police and law-enforcement agencies may provide assistance directly, but any request involving compulsory measures must proceed under the Treaty proper. Such communications should normally travel through INTERPOL.
Representation, expenses and residual matters are covered in Articles 19–22. The Requested State must represent the interests of the Requesting State unless otherwise provided. The Requested State bears ordinary costs; the Requesting State pays for conveyance and custody of persons under Articles 13 and 14, escorting officers, and any exceptional third-party liabilities identified in advance. The Treaty does not derogate from other existing obligations or prevent further assistance under other instruments (Article 20). Consultation between Central Offices and between the Parties is mandated for operational difficulties or interpretation questions; unresolved treaty interpretation disputes may be referred to the International Court of Justice, although such referral does not affect the validity of executive or judicial decisions already made on the underlying request (Article 21). The Treaty enters into force 180 days after notification of completed internal requirements, applies to requests regardless of when the underlying acts occurred, and may be terminated on 180 days’ notice (Article 22).
In aggregate the Regulations and incorporated Treaty create a self-contained, reciprocal, conditional system for the exchange of evidence and investigative assistance that is narrower than extradition but broader than informal police cooperation, hedged by dual-criminality, human-rights, sovereignty and specialty protections at every material step.
Who it affects
The Regulations directly affect the Australian Attorney-General’s Department (as Central Office), Australian law-enforcement agencies (Australian Federal Police, Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions, State and Territory police services), courts and tribunals that receive foreign evidence obtained under the Treaty, and any person in Australia who is the subject of a Swiss request or who is asked to provide evidence or documents.
On the Swiss side the Federal Office for Police Matters (until another authority is designated) and all Swiss judicial and law-enforcement authorities competent to execute Australian requests are engaged. Individuals located in either country who are witnesses, experts, suspects, accused persons, prisoners or third-party holders of relevant documents or assets are directly affected. Victims of offences to whom proceeds may be remitted also fall within the scope.
Because the Treaty applies to “investigations or proceedings in respect of offences the punishment of which falls or would fall within the jurisdiction of the judicial authorities of the Requesting State” (Article 1(1)), any Commonwealth, State or Territory prosecution or investigation that could result in criminal punishment engages the regime when Swiss assistance is sought. Conversely, any Swiss federal or cantonal investigation that could lead to criminal punishment can trigger Australian assistance.
Private legal practitioners representing clients who are subjects of requests, or who appear on behalf of witnesses, are required to understand the limitations on use (Article 4), the right to decline to give evidence (Article 11), safe-conduct rules (Article 15) and the consequences of third-party claims to returned material (Article 9). Financial institutions, telecommunications providers and other third parties holding documents or data that may be the subject of production or search-and-seizure requests are indirectly affected through the execution mechanisms of the Act as modified by the Regulations.
Key duties and rights
The Central Offices owe duties to transmit, expedite and monitor requests (Article 6(2)), to consult on operational difficulties (Article 21(1)), and to provide certificates concerning immunity from giving evidence (Article 11). The Requested State owes duties to apply its law consistently with a domestic matter (Article 8(1)), to endeavour to follow requested procedures (Article 8(2)), to notify of delays or refusals with reasons (Articles 8(5) and 8(7)), to consider conditional assistance before outright refusal (Article 8(8)), to use best endeavours to maintain requested confidentiality (Article 5(1)), and to return material when requested after proceedings conclude (Article 9).
The Requesting State owes reciprocal duties: to observe use limitations and confidentiality (Articles 4 and 5(2)), to return prisoners or witnesses at the stipulated time (Articles 13(3) and 15(3)), to bear the costs allocated to it under Article 19(2), and to comply with any conditions imposed by the Requested State (Article 8(8)).
Individuals enjoy several express rights. A person required to give evidence may decline if a privilege or immunity exists under the law of either State (Article 11). A prisoner cannot be compelled to consent to transfer and cannot be penalised for withholding consent (Article 13(6)). A summoned witness or expert who does not appear cannot be penalised or coerced (Article 14(4)). Safe-conduct protections prevent prosecution, arrest or certain civil suits for prior acts or omissions and limit the obligation to give evidence to the proceedings identified in the request (Article 15(1)–(2)). These protections cease only after thirty days’ voluntary presence following notification that presence is no longer required (Article 15(3)). A person whose evidence is being taken may, in defined circumstances, have their lawyer present and asking questions (Article 10(2)).
Victims or other persons entitled to proceeds of crime that are handed over may assert claims through the mechanisms contemplated in Article 16(2) and Article 9. Third parties who assert claims to documents or material before handover must have those claims respected by the Requesting State (Article 9).
Penalties and enforcement
The Regulations and Treaty themselves contain no criminal offence provisions or monetary penalties. Enforcement occurs through the domestic law of the Requested State when executing requests. Refusal of assistance is a sovereign executive decision reviewable, if at all, only under the administrative law of the Requested State; the Treaty does not create a private right to compel or prevent assistance.
Where a person refuses to comply with a compulsory measure lawfully issued under the domestic law applied pursuant to Article 8, ordinary domestic contempt, obstruction or failure-to-comply sanctions apply. A prisoner who consents to transfer but then escapes while in the Requesting State would be subject to the Requesting State’s custodial and escape legislation, but the period of custody is credited against the original sentence (Article 13(4)).
Breach of use limitations or confidentiality undertakings by the Requesting State does not trigger automatic sanctions under the Treaty; rather it may ground a refusal of future assistance or diplomatic consultation under Article 21. Perjury committed while giving evidence under the Treaty remains prosecutable in the Requesting State (Article 15(4)).
How it interacts with other laws
The Regulations expressly apply the Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters Act 1987 “subject to such limitations, conditions, exceptions or qualifications as are necessary to give effect to the Treaty” (s 4(1)). Consequently the Act’s general provisions on requests, execution, privileges, immunities and proceeds of crime are read down or supplemented wherever the Treaty is more restrictive or more detailed.
The Treaty itself is expressed not to derogate from obligations under other treaties or arrangements (Article 20). It therefore sits alongside any extradition treaty, mutual legal assistance treaties with third countries, and multilateral conventions (for example, United Nations conventions on drugs or transnational organised crime) that Australia and Switzerland have both ratified. Where those instruments contain more favourable provisions they may be used instead.
Domestic evidence laws interact at several points. The admissibility of foreign evidence obtained under the Treaty in Australian proceedings remains governed by the Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) and any applicable State legislation, but the presence rights in Article 10(2) are designed to ensure compliance with those rules. The right to decline to give evidence (Article 11) expressly incorporates privileges arising under Australian law even when evidence is taken in Switzerland.
Proceeds-of-crime legislation (Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (Cth) and its predecessors) supplies the substantive Australian power to restrain and confiscate assets at Switzerland’s request, while the Treaty supplies the procedural channel and the grounds for refusal. The same applies in reverse for Australian requests to Switzerland.
Human-rights legislation and common-law principles of natural justice are relevant to the discretionary refusal grounds in Article 2(1)(e) (discrimination) and the obligation to consider conditional assistance before refusal (Article 8(8)).
Recent changes and why
The source text records only one internal change: the repeal of the Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters (Swiss Confederation) Regulations 1988 (Statutory Rules 1988 No. 385) by regulation 5. The 1994 Regulations were made to give effect to the new Treaty signed at Berne on 25 November 1991, which replaced or updated the earlier arrangements reflected in the 1988 regulations. The 1991 Treaty expanded the list of available forms of assistance (expressly adding tracing, freezing, confiscating and returning of proceeds of crime) and introduced more detailed provisions on safe conduct, prisoner transfer, use limitations and confidentiality that were either absent or less developed in the prior instrument. The change was driven by the desire expressed in the preamble to “extend to each other the widest measure of co-operation to combat crime” while preserving the safeguards required by each Party’s legal system. No further textual amendments appear in the provided document.
Court challenges and controversies
The Treaty text itself does not record or refer to any decided court challenges. Article 21(3) provides a state-to-state mechanism for resolution of disputes concerning interpretation of the Treaty by referral to the International Court of Justice, but expressly states that such a dispute settlement “shall not affect the validity of the final decision of an executive or judicial authority of a Contracting Party made in connection with a request giving rise to the dispute” (Article 21(4)). This preserves the finality of domestic decisions even while permitting diplomatic or judicial resolution of systemic interpretation differences.
No controversy or interpretive note is appended to the Regulations or Schedule. In practice, controversies are likely to arise around the breadth of the “political offence” exception, the refusal ground for fiscal offences, the precise scope of dual criminality under Article 3, and the operation of the thirty-day safe-conduct window in Article 15(3). The source text supplies no case law resolving these points; any resolution would occur through the consultation mechanisms in Article 21 or through domestic judicial review in the Requested State when a request is refused or conditions are imposed.
Gotchas
Most practitioners assume that once a request is made it will be executed; Article 2 and Article 3 together create a wide discretionary gateway that can defeat even seemingly routine requests. The fiscal-offence refusal ground (Article 2(1)(b)) is broader than many modern treaties and can catch sophisticated tax-fraud matters if the Requested State characterises them as purely fiscal. Dual-criminality for compulsory measures (Article 3) is assessed on the hypothetical transposition of “acts or omissions … in similar circumstances”, an exercise that requires careful hypothetical pleading and can fail on technical differences in corporate liability or mens rea.
The safe-conduct rule in Article 15(3) contains an unforgiving trap: the thirty-day period runs from the date the person is “officially notified that his or her appearance is no longer required”. There is no requirement that the person actually leave within thirty days of finishing their evidence; the clock can start earlier. Remaining beyond that date, even for unrelated personal reasons, strips the immunity for prior acts and exposes the person to prosecution or civil suit.
Article 4’s specialty rule binds the Requesting State not to use the material for any purpose for which assistance “would not be granted under this Treaty”. This is wider than the usual “not for other offences” formulation and can prevent use in parallel civil or regulatory proceedings even if those proceedings arise from the same facts. Consent to wider use must be obtained in advance and in writing; implied consent is not contemplated.
Article 13(6) is easily overlooked: a prisoner who refuses consent cannot be subjected to “any penalty or … any coercive measure”. This precludes even adverse comment in sentencing or parole decisions that could be construed as punishment for the refusal. The provision is absolute.
The language rule in Article 7(3) is strict and one-way: Australia must translate its supporting documents into a Swiss official language chosen by Switzerland in each case. Failure to do so can result in the request being returned for supplementation under Article 7(4), causing months of delay in time-sensitive investigations.
Finally, the cost allocation in Article 19(2) is not intuitive. Australia must pay for the transport and custody of its own prisoners sent to Switzerland as well as for Swiss witnesses brought to Australia, plus any “exceptional expenses” notified in advance. What counts as exceptional is determined unilaterally by the Requested State; there is no independent arbiter.
How to comply
Australian competent authorities should route every outgoing request through the Attorney-General’s Department acting as Central Office. The request must satisfy every mandatory element of Article 7(1) and, to the greatest extent practicable, the desirable elements of Article 7(2). Particular procedures (for example, video-link testimony or specific forms of oath) must be spelled out if required for admissibility in Australian proceedings. Confidentiality requirements and the reasons for them must be articulated if any suppression of the request or its contents is sought.
When executing an incoming Swiss request, Australian agencies must apply the Act as modified by the Regulations, observe any conditions imposed by Switzerland, and ensure that material is used only for the purpose stated in the request unless prior Swiss consent is obtained. If evidence is to be taken in Australia for Swiss proceedings, the Swiss authority, the persons to whom the Swiss proceedings relate and their legal representatives must be permitted to attend and question witnesses where either the evidence would otherwise be inadmissible in Switzerland or Switzerland has satisfied Australia that their presence would facilitate the request (Article 10(2)).
Prisoner transfers require the prisoner’s informed consent; any suggestion of adverse consequences for refusal must be avoided. Returned prisoners must be held in custody until the Australian proceedings conclude and then promptly repatriated. Time served in Australia is credited against the Swiss sentence.
When producing or seizing material that belongs to third parties, agencies must be alert to Article 9’s obligation to respect claims asserted before handover and to return the material once Australian proceedings are complete if Switzerland so requests.
Costs must be managed in advance: Australian authorities should flag any anticipated exceptional expenses and obtain agreement on cost-sharing before significant outlays are incurred. All communications with the Swiss Central Office should be documented to create an audit trail for potential Article 21 consultations.
Compliance checklists should include: dual-criminality analysis before seeking compulsory measures; explicit safe-conduct warnings to witnesses and prisoners; written consent before any onward disclosure of received material; and a diary system to track the thirty-day safe-conduct window for each individual transferred or summoned.
Regular training for investigators and prosecutors on the precise wording of the refusal grounds and use limitations is essential, because an incautious request that triggers a refusal can prejudice future cooperation in the same matter. Central Office should maintain precedents of successful Swiss requests and refusals to refine drafting technique over time.
By treating the Treaty text as the operative legal instrument rather than a high-level policy document, and by observing its procedural and substantive guardrails at every step, Australian agencies can maximise the likelihood that assistance will be granted and that any evidence obtained will be admissible in subsequent proceedings.