The protection of privacy and perhaps also the endeavor not to call for denouncing are reasons why Swiss courts rarely allow a dashcam recording as evidence. It therefore seems almost useless to leave the mini camera in the car. The rare exception: If you want to exonerate yourself from a serious accusation, this is partly accepted.
But what if you weren’t filming the traffic at all – just yourself? Numerous readers asked us this question. An answer would also be interesting for Blick authoring editor Andreas Engel, who, according to his own statement, wore the belt, but was fined for not wearing it. The answer: The legal situation would remain rather delicate, but the chances would be better.
Only film the interior?
There are very narrow limits to the surveillance of the public space to which the street belongs. Because our personal rights allow us to determine ourselves about recordings of ourselves. We can’t do that with dashcams – because we don’t even know that a car driver is picking us up. Therefore, these recordings are rarely admitted as evidence.
However, if editor Engel had had a recording of a dashcam directed at himself, the legal situation would be less delicate. He wouldn’t have filmed the public, but the interior of the vehicle. This is permitted if little of the other traffic can be seen around it.
TCS attorney gives hope
If Engel had filmed himself, the dashcam recordings might have helped him, says TCS lawyer Yves Alain Moor: “If the recordings only concern the car, they could be used as evidence.” But there is one caveat. “If the judge allows the recordings.”
Because the crux of the matter is: In this case too, the decision in each individual case would lie with the court. It would have to weigh up whether a 60-franc fine like the one from editor Engel justifies evaluating the recordings as evidence despite general reservations about such video recordings. And how that would be judged is rather open in view of the vague dashcam legal situation.
More likely in severe cases
In general, the chances of admission of admission as evidence increase if it does not burden others but relieves you – and with the severity of the offense. For example, anyone who is said to have written messages on their cell phone can, in serious cases, be punished with three months of ID withdrawal. Then a dashcam, available for CHF 25 to over 200, could provide relief.
In the event of accidents, dashcams are more likely to be used to determine what happened. Even if they are filming the street. However, only if the accused faces a hefty punishment. The Basel Criminal Court acquitted a driver on the basis of his own video recordings, for example: These showed that the woman he ran over had given him no chance to brake in time at the pedestrian crossing. In view of the gravity (bodily harm!) Of the case, the interest in clearing it out outweighed the interest.