In a nutshell

According to Art. 42 FADP, the claims under Art. 41 FADP can be asserted in the context of an access procedure under the Public Access Act, provided that the documents in question contain personal data. The provision thus takes account of the fact that the protective purposes of the FADP and the FoIA, namely informational self-determination as part of the protection of privacy on the one hand and the principle of transparency of the administration on the other, can be in tension.

I. Preliminary remarks

1The former Art. 25^bis aDSG was introduced with the entry into force of the Federal Act on the Publicity of the Administration (Publicity Act, FoIA). This established the principles of coordination between the FADP and the FoIA. In the revised version of the FADP of 2023, the content of the provision was not changed; it can now be found in Art. 42 FADP.

2The provision ensures that a data subject can assert their data protection claims as part of the access procedure under the Public Access Act. This means that the access procedure is extended to include these data protection issues.

II. Assertion of claims pursuant to Art. 41 FADP in the access procedure

3The FoIA provides that every person has the right to inspect official documents and to obtain information from the authorities about the content of official documents (principle of public access, Art. 6 para. 1 FoIA). However, access may be restricted, postponed or denied if the granting of access may adversely affect the privacy of third parties, provided that the public interest in access does not outweigh this (Art. 7 para. 2 FoIA).

4In order to protect the privacy of third parties in the access procedure, official documents containing personal data must in principle be anonymized (Art. 9 FoIA). However, if anonymization is not possible, for example because the content and context of the official document would no longer be comprehensible or because it would involve a disproportionate effort (which requires a comprehensive weighing of interests by the federal body), access may only be granted under the condition of Art. 36 FADP, which regulates the disclosure of data by federal bodies (see commentary). If the authority is considering granting access, it must first give the data subject whose personal data is contained in the documents in question and whose privacy may be affected by this the opportunity to comment within 10 days. As part of this statement, the data subject may not only request that their data not be disclosed to the applicant. Rather, Art. 42 FADP allows them to assert their claim for the omission of unlawful data processing, the elimination of the consequences of unlawful data processing or the determination of the unlawfulness of data processing (see commentary on Art. 41 FADP). The claims must relate to the documents that are the subject of the access procedure.

5If the authority wishes to grant access contrary to the opinion of the data subject, it must inform the data subject accordingly (Art. 11 para. 2 FoIA). The data subject may then request mediation from the FDPIC within 20 days. If the mediation fails, the FDPIC will issue a recommendation. The authority must then issue an order if it either does not follow the recommendation or if the person concerned (or the applicant) requests such an order (Art. 15 para. 1 and para. 2 lit. b FoIA). An appeal against this decision may be lodged with the Federal Administrative Court (Art. 16 para. 1 FoIA).

6Art. 42 FADP is thus intended, among other things, to ensure procedural economy, as the person concerned may only become aware that their personal data is contained in the official documents in question when they are invited to comment. Accordingly, it may make sense for the data protection aspects to be assessed as part of the access procedure. One criticism of this solution is that it makes the access procedure cumbersome and lengthy.

Bibliography

Egli Patricia, Datenschutz und Öffentlichkeitsprinzip, in: Forum Europarecht Band/Nr. 35, Jahr 2015, S. 133-155.

Gautschi Adrian, Kommentierung zu Art. 42 DSG, in: Blechta, Gabor-Paul/Vasella David (Hrsg.), Balser Kommentar, Datenschutzgesetz, 4. Aufl. Basel 2024.

Jöhri Yvonne, Kommentierung zu Art. 25^bis DSG, in: Rosenthal David/Jöhri Yvonne, Handkommentar zum Datenschutzgesetz, Zürich/Basel/Genf 2008.

Kölz Alfred/Häner Isabell/Bertschi Martin, Verwaltungsverfahren und Verwaltungsrechtspflege des Bundes, 3. Aufl., Zürich 2013.

Stoffel Martine/Poncet Marie, Kommentierung zu Art. 41 DSG, in: Bieri Adrian/Powell Julian (Hrsg.), OFK-Orell Füssli Kommentar (Navigator.ch), Zürich 2023.

Sturny Monique, Kommentierung zu Art. 42, in: Baeriswyl Bruno/Pärli Kurt/Blonski Dominika (Hrsg.), Stämpflis Handkommentar (SHK) zum Datenschutzgesetz, 2. Aufl., Zürich 2023.

Materials

Botschaft zum Bundesgesetz über die Öffentlichkeit der Verwaltung vom 12.2.2003 (BBl 2003 1963).

Botschaft zum Bundesgesetz über die Totalrevision des Bundesgesetzes über den Datenschutz und die Änderung weiterer Erlasse zum Datenschutz vom 15.9.2017 (BBl 2017 6941).