Federal Court Judge Says Affair Was Not Illegal.
Swiss Federal Court judge Yves Donzallaz has publicly defended his past relationship with fellow judge Beatrice van de Graaf, stating that while the affair may have been inappropriate, it was not illegal under Swiss law.
In an interview with the Tamedia newspaper group, Donzallaz explained that the relationship, which lasted for nearly a year, never violated legal requirements governing members of Switzerland’s highest court. According to him, the relationship ended around Easter 2026 and never developed into a shared long-term living arrangement.
The controversy centers on provisions within the Federal Court Act that prohibit judges who are in a long-term cohabitation from serving on the same judicial panels. Donzallaz argued that the legal definition of cohabitation did not apply in their case because they did not share a residence or maintain a common household.
The judge stated that he and van de Graaf spent limited time together and never worked on the same judicial panel during their relationship. As a result, he believes there was no conflict of interest and no legal obligation to disclose the relationship.
The matter gained public attention after media reports revealed the relationship in April. In response, federal judges held an extraordinary meeting in May and concluded that romantic relationships between sitting members of the Federal Court are inconsistent with the court’s professional customs and ethical expectations.
An independent panel of experts is currently examining questions related to judicial independence and governance within Switzerland’s highest court. The panel is expected to submit its findings to the court’s Administrative Commission by the end of June.
Despite the controversy, Donzallaz has confirmed his intention to seek another term on the Federal Court for the 2027–2032 period. He maintains that he acted within the law and believes he has committed no wrongdoing. However, due to age limits, he would leave office in 2029 if re-elected.
The case has sparked a wider national debate about judicial transparency, ethics, and the balance between private life and public responsibility within Switzerland’s legal system.