Nemo tenetur et inexploitabilité au
pénal des preuves recueillies par la
FINMA (suite)

The Swiss Federal Supreme Court ruled in 2025 that forms completed by a company representative at FINMA's request were inadmissible evidence for the purpose of a criminal proceedings because he was not informed of his right against self-incrimination, and the information could lead to criminal prosecution. The Court of Appeals of the Federal Criminal Tribunal subsequently clarified that pre-existing documents annexed to these forms remained admissible, as FINMA would have obtained them through other means. In a separate case, a defendant was acquitted of providing false information because the incriminating documents were collected without respecting nemo tenetur.

Hence, criminal authorities cannot freely rely on evidence gathered through administrative cooperation obligations. Defense counsel must systematically verify whether administrative evidence was collected in compliance with nemo tenetur. FINMA may need to inform regulated parties of their right against self-incrimination when requested information could support criminal charges.