Switzerland has long been seen as a beacon of privacy where companies, organizations and wealthy people put down roots in an effort to avoid the prying eyes of the rest of the world. Joining this cohort are many Web3 projects, which also appreciate the Swiss government’s generally positive stance toward blockchain and digital assets.
The country’s reputation as a privacy haven has resulted in Switzerland becoming a hub for privacy projects establishing their foundations or development entities there, including Nym, Session and Hopr — joining traditional privacy software companies such as Proton and Threema.
Now, a proposed change to a Swiss surveillance ordinance is worrying these same projects, as it would spell a marked increase in the government’s user monitoring requirements. But the decentralized nature of crypto may offer a solution for those wishing to preserve their privacy in a climate of increasing surveillance.
Switzerland is a privacy haven — or maybe not
Switzerland has long been considered by many to have some of the world’s strongest privacy protections. As Proton, the company behind the encrypted Proton Mail email service, argued in a 2014 blog post titled “Why Switzerland?”, the Central European country offers several advantages: Companies are outside of the jurisdiction of the US and EU, the country is politically neutral, there are strong constitutional privacy protections, and there is established infrastructure.
Kee Jeffries, technical co-founder of decentralized private messaging app Session, recently told Cointelegraph’s The Agenda podcast that it was important to establish the foundation “in a country which has a long history of preserving people’s personal privacy and freedom of speech.”
However, all governments must ultimately balance citizen privacy and national security concerns. In Switzerland, surveillance is governed by the Ordinance on the Surveillance of Correspondence by Post and Telecommunications (OSCPT).
In January, the Swiss Federal Council proposed a revision to the OSCPT that would increase user monitoring requirements for telecommunications service providers and widen the definition of who meets these requirements to include services such as VPNs, social networks and messaging apps.
In short, as they are currently written, the changes would require service providers that serve at least 5,000 users to identify all users and willfully decrypt all communications that are not end-to-end encrypted.
Privacy projects fight back against surveillance
The move has been met with widespread backlash from the privacy community. Proton CEO Andy Yen has threatened to fight the government in court and potentially pull the company out of the country. Decentralized VPN provider Nym issued a public call to action for Swiss citizens to contact their representatives and oppose the action.
In a statement, Nym’s chief operating officer, Alexis Roussel, said the ordinance by the Federal Council “is destroying an entire sector,” adding:
“This ordinance directly endangers the people who use these services.”
Sebastian Bürgel, vice president of technology at Gnosis and founder of decentralized mixnet Hopr, echoed the concerns of Yen and Roussel, telling Cointelegraph the move would likely backfire.
“If the intent is to limit the privacy and anonymity that services such as Proton Mail, Proton VPN and Threema are providing, that will not change much because those entities will potentially leave Switzerland if that were to happen,” he said. “But again, the consequences will be borne by everyone out there and everyone who’s actually in Switzerland.”
Meanwhile, Ronald Kogens, a legal partner at Swiss law firm MME who focuses on Web3 and fintech, told Cointelegraph that it’s unclear whether the Swiss Federal Council even has the authority to implement such changes.
“In an ordinance, you cannot include any heavy rights or obligations which have a strong impact on individuals in Switzerland,” he shared, saying that the Federal Council is essentially an executive body and that laws must pass through parliament.
“One question you could ask is, does the Federal Council have the power, based on the laws where it stated that they can enact an ordinance, the power to do this, what they’re doing now?”
Are Swiss crypto projects at risk?
The move by the Swiss Federal Council is damaging Switzerland’s privacy reputation, but decentralized technologies like blockchain networks may offer a lifeline. According to Kogens, truly decentralized projects should be exempt from the new surveillance requirements.
“In my opinion, most Web3 activities are not affected because […] the pure offering of software without running any infrastructure for the whole messaging or communication system is not covered by this,” he told Cointelegraph. “You have to have specific servers or clients that you operate that are an essential part of the communication or messaging service.”
Either way, the more decentralized a project is, the less any government can influence its operations. Take, for example, Tornado Cash, which has continued chugging along for years despite multiple developers being arrested and the US sanctioning its smart contracts at one point.
Nym CEO Harry Halpin told Cointelegraph in March that “in theory, we should be able to get run over with a car, and the network would keep operating.”
“Hopr, as an example of Web3 infrastructure, does not operate infrastructure, right?” said Bürgel. “Hopr Association is involved in software development and research and development, but we are not an operator of a network.”
The fact that the Hopr network is fully decentralized and anonymous means the Hopr Association could not actually give any information about its users to Switzerland, even if it were legally compelled.
“Individual node runners which are participating in it, or other third parties, cannot tell who is using the Hopr network to access any kind of web service. That is the explicit goal of what we are undertaking.”
The future of privacy in Switzerland
The Swiss Federal Council’s proposed changes to the OSCPT are still in the consultation phase, with the public encouraged to offer feedback on the proposal through May 6.
Kogens told Cointelegraph that the council will review the feedback, create a final report, and decide whether to adjust the proposal. “That happens quite a lot,” he said, “because in the end, it’s not in the interest of Switzerland to do something which harms the industry, as long as they still can fulfill their goal, which they have with this surveillance act.”
But even if the changes go through as written, there could be some positive knock-on effects for the crypto space. “It may be that the silver lining is that it will drive users to decentralized and privacy-facilitating solutions instead,” said Bürgel.
“It is clear to everyone that more surveillance is bad,” he added. “Every single individual understands that.”
“Taming the surveillance machinery is a goal of Web3. It’s not just about magic internet money. And yeah, I think we need more people working towards that.”
The elections watchdog has criticised the government for offering to consider delaying 63 local council elections next year – as five authorities confirmed to Sky News that they would ask for a postponement.
On Thursday, hours before parliament began its Christmas recess, the government revealed that councils were being sent a letter asking if they thought elections should be delayed in their areas due to challenges around delivering local government reorganisation plans.
The chief executive of the Electoral Commission, Vijay Rangarajan, hit out at the announcement on Friday, saying he was “concerned” that some elections could be postponed, with some having already been deferred from 2025.
“We are disappointed by both the timing and substance of the statement. Scheduled elections should, as a rule, go ahead as planned, and only be postponed in exceptional circumstances,” he said in a statement.
“Decisions on any postponements will not be taken until mid-January, less than three months before the scheduled May 2026 elections are due to begin.
“This uncertainty is unprecedented and will not help campaigners and administrators who need time to prepare for their important roles.”
Mr Rangarajan added: “We very much recognise the pressures on local government, but these late changes do not help administrators. Parties and candidates have already been preparing for some time, and will be understandably concerned.”
He said “capacity constraints” were not a “legitimate reason for delaying long planned elections”, which risked “affecting the legitimacy of local decision-making and damaging public confidence”.
The watchdog chief also said there was “a clear conflict of interest in asking existing councils to decide how long it will be before they are answerable to voters”.
Four mayoral elections due to take place in May 2026 set to be postponed
Sky News contacted the 63 councils that have been sent the letter about potentially delaying their elections.
At the time of publication, 17 authorities had replied with their decisions, while 33 said they would make up their minds before the government’s deadline of 15 January.
Many councils told Sky News they were surprised at yesterday’s announcement, saying that they had been fully intending to hold their polls as scheduled.
They said they were now working to understand the appropriate democratic mechanism for deciding whether to request a postponement of elections. Some local authorities believe it should be a decision made by their full council, while others will leave it up to council leaders or cabinet members to decide.
Multiple councils also emphasised in statements to Sky News that the ultimate decision to delay elections lay with the government.
X
This content is provided by X, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable X cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to X cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow X cookies for this session only.
Reform UK has threatened legal action against ministers, accusing Labour and the Tories of “colluding” to postpone elections in order to lock other parties out of power – a sentiment echoed by Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey.
But shadow local government secretary Sir James Cleverly told Sky News this morning that the Conservative Party “wants these elections to go ahead”. Sky News understands that the national party is making that position clear to local leaders.
A spokesperson for the Ministry of Housing, Communities, and Local Government, said it was taking a “locally-led approach”, and emphasised that “councils are in the best position to judge the impact of postponements on their area”.
They added: “These are exceptional circumstances where councils have told us they’re struggling to prepare for resource-intensive elections to councils that will shortly be abolished, while also reorganising into more efficient authorities that can better serve local residents.
“There is a clear precedent for postponing local elections where local government reorganisation is in progress, as happened in 2019 and 2022.”
The five councils that confirmed they would be seeking postponements were:
Blackburn with Darwen Council (Labour);
Chorley Borough Council (Labour);
East Sussex County Council (Conservative minority);
Hastings Borough Council (Green minority);
West Sussex County Council (Conservative).
The councils in Chorley, and East and West Sussex, had decided prior to Thursday’s government announcement that they would request a delay.
Can the Conservatives make ground at the local elections in 2026?
An East Sussex County Council spokesperson told Sky News: “It is welcome that the government is listening to local leaders and has heard the case for focussing our resources on delivery in East Sussex, particularly with devolution and reorganisation of local government, as well as delivering services to residents, such high priorities.”
They also pointed to the cost of electing councillors for a term of just one year, and argued that it would be “more prudent for just one set of elections to be held in 2027”.
West Sussex County Council echoed those reasons and said it would cost taxpayers across the county £9m to hold elections in 2026, 2027, and 2028, as currently planned.
Chorley and Blackburn councils also cited the cost of delivering elections, and said they would prefer that money be spent on delivering the local government reorganisation and delivering services to local residents.
Meanwhile, 12 councils confirmed to Sky News that they would not be requesting delays:
Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council (Liberal Democrat-Independents);
Broxbourne Borough Council (Conservative);
Colchester City Council (Labour-Liberal Democrat);
Eastleigh Borough Council (Liberal Democrat);
Essex County Council (Conservative);
Hart District Council (Liberal Democrat-Community Campaign);
Hastings Borough Council (Green minority);
Isle of Wight Council (no overall control);
Newcastle-under-Lyme Borough Council (Conservative);
Portsmouth City Council (Liberal Democrat minority);
Keonne Rodriguez, who pleaded guilty to one felony count related to his role at Samourai Wallet, is calling on US President Donald Trump to pardon him, citing similar language that has been successful in previous pardon applications.
In a Thursday X post, Rodriguez said he would report to prison on Friday, where he will serve a five-year sentence for operating an illegal money transmitter. The Samourai co-founder claimed there were no “victims” to his crime, and blamed his incarceration on “lawfare perpetrated by a weaponized Biden DOJ.”
In a message tagging Trump, Rodriguez expressed hope that the US president would issue a federal pardon for him and William “Bill” Lonergan Hill, another Samourai executive who pleaded guilty and was sentenced to four years. Rodriguez blamed “activist judges” for his legal troubles, claiming he was targeted by a “political anti-innovation agenda.”
“I maintain hope that [Trump] is a fair man, a man of the people, who will see this prosecution for what it was: an anti innovation, anti american, attack on the rights and liberties of free people,” said Rodriguez. “I believe his team […] and others truly want to end the weaponization of the DOJ that the previous administration wielded so effectively […] I believe he will continue to wield that power for good and pardon me and Bill.”
Rodriguez’s public plea followed Trump’s statement that he would “take a look” at a pardon for the Samourai co-founder, claiming that he had no knowledge of the case. It’s unclear whether Rodriguez filed an official application for a pardon or is relying on public statements to get the president’s attention.
Other crypto execs successfully lobbied for a Trump pardon
One of Trump’s first acts as president in January was to issue a pardon for Silk Road founder Ross Ulbricht, who had been serving a life sentence for his role in creating and operating the darknet marketplace.
Former Binance CEO Changpeng “CZ” Zhao, who pleaded guilty to one felony in 2023 related to the exchange’s Anti-Money Laundering program, served four months in prison but also received a pardon from the president. Trump later said he “[knew] nothing about” Zhao when asked about the pardon in a November interview.
Rodriguez’s language addressing Trump mirrored comments from the White House on previous pardons. For example, Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said it was a “weaponization of justice from the previous administration” when the president commuted the sentence of David Gentile, who was convicted of defrauding “thousands of individual investors in a $1.6 billion” scheme in 2024.
Crypto users on Polymarket were not given the choice of betting on the odds of a Trump pardon of Rodriguez as of Friday. At the time of publication, Trump ally Steve Bannon had the highest odds, at 9%.
The United Kingdom is taking a decisive step toward fully regulating its crypto market. This week, the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) launched a wide-ranging consultation outlining proposed rules for crypto exchanges, staking services, lending platforms and decentralized finance.
The proposals follow new secondary legislation from the UK Treasury that formally brings crypto activities into the country’s financial services framework, with a target implementation date of Oct. 25, 2027.
In this week’s episode of Byte-Sized Insight, Cointelegraph explored what this consultation signals for the UK crypto market and how industry leaders are interpreting the regulator’s direction. We spoke with Perry Scott, head of UK policy at Kraken and chair of the UK Cryptoasset Business Council, to break down what’s new and what’s at stake.
From fragmented oversight to full market structure
Until now, the UK’s approach to crypto regulation has been piecemeal. Companies have operated under anti-money laundering rules and strict financial promotion requirements, but there has been no unified framework governing how crypto markets should function.
Scott described the moment as long anticipated.
“Christmas has come early for policy nerds like me,” he said, pointing to the scale of the proposals, which span “around 700 pages to sink our teeth into.”
More importantly, the consultation comes with a firm timeline. “Mark your calendars because the firing gun has been fired,” Scott said, referring to the 2027 go-live date, which gives a signal that the industry is moving from waiting to preparing.
At the core of the consultation is market structure, particularly how exchanges are regulated and how they access liquidity. Scott welcomed the FCA’s recognition that crypto markets are inherently global, saying that “accessing global liquidity will support better execution outcomes for consumers.”
The UK is also carving out a distinct approach to staking. Earlier this year, it became one of the first major jurisdictions to separate staking from traditional financial services rules. Under the consultation, staking would be governed by bespoke requirements, a move Scott called “world leading.”
The consultation is open until Feb. 12, and companies are already adjusting.
“UK firms aren’t going to sit around and wait,” Scott said.
He said regulatory certainty could create “hundreds, if not thousands of jobs” across compliance, legal and technical roles.
As the UK positions itself between the EU’s Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA) regime and renewed regulatory momentum in the US, the outcome of this process could determine whether it emerges as a competitive crypto hub or struggles to keep pace.
To hear the complete conversation on Byte-Sized Insight, listen to the full episode on Cointelegraph’s Podcasts page, Apple Podcasts or Spotify. And remember to check out Cointelegraph’s full lineup of other shows!