Defies Common Sense

The prosecutor general's office saw this coming. In January 2023, several months before the investigation into the current immigration fraud case even began, it submitted an opinion on the overhaul of the Ju-Cha database. The opinion warned that restricting the public prosecutor's ability to share information to a predetermined list of offences "defies common sense and cannot be justified."[1]

Nobody listened.

The question that went unanswered

The prosecutor general's office posed a direct question in its 2023 opinion: "Therefore, when a civil servant is guilty of fraud, breach of trust, theft, embezzlement of public funds, corruption, forgery, counterfeiting, incitement to hatred, etc., would the public prosecutor not have the right to immediately inform the relevant ministry in order to initiate disciplinary proceedings and prevent a disturbance of public order?"[1]

The answer, under the law as passed, is no. The public prosecutor cannot share that information. The list of offences covered by the information-sharing mechanism was limited to murder, paedophilia, and similarly serious crimes. Corruption, fraud, forgery, and embezzlement are not on the list. The very offences at the heart of the current scandal are the ones the prosecutor is legally barred from reporting to the affected administrations.[1]

How the list survived

The initial text, proposed by then-Justice Minister Sam Tanson, was broader. It would have allowed the prosecutor to inform both public and private employers about crimes committed by their staff without a restrictive list. The Council of State rejected it, deeming it too broad. A specific list of offences was incorporated.[1]

The prosecutor general's office objected in January 2023. The law was amended. The Council of State raised a formal objection a second time. The Chamber of Deputies backed down. The version passed and brought into force only a few weeks ago once again includes a list that severely limits the public prosecutor's ability to share information. The offences under investigation in the current case are not on that list.[1]

Could have been prevented

The timeline is the most damning part. January 2023: the prosecutor general warns that the restrictions defy common sense. The investigation begins months later. It proceeds for three years. Twenty-seven searches are conducted. Two hundred files are examined. The scandal becomes public in July 2026. And the law that prevented the prosecutor from sharing information with the ministries being defrauded was still in force when the scandal broke.[1]

The prosecutor's office also warned in 2023 that civil servants could only be suspended if they committed an offence explicitly on the list, since authorities would not be permitted to share information about other offences. A civil servant committing corruption, which is not on the list, could not be flagged to their ministry. They could continue working, continue having access, continue exploiting the system.[1]

Three days, one scandal

This is the third day the story has unfolded. On Wednesday, the searches and the Swiss cheese metaphor: three ministries, three failures. On Thursday, ASTI called for full disclosure and warned against stigmatising immigrants. On Friday, the revelation that the prosecutor general flagged the problem years ago and was overruled by the Council of State and the Chamber.[1]

The scandal is not just about fake diplomas and fraudulent visas. It is about a legal framework that was warned, amended, warned again, and still passed in a form that prevented the very information sharing that could have stopped it. The holes in the Swiss cheese were not accidental. They were built into the system on purpose, over the objections of the people who could see what was coming.