Swiss psychologists are untouchable
I will cover here how Swiss psychologists are untouchable disciplinary, in civil court and in criminal court. Swiss psychologists can claim and act whichever way they pretty please regardless of their deontological code, and violate the most basic human rights. Nothing can be held against them, and their opinions are to the legal system uncontestable and true.
Switzerland is known to have hundreds of thousands expats either living or working in Switzerland. This is a warning particularly to them.
In Switzerland psychologists are federated through the Fédération Suisse des Psychologues, or FSP.
I take a few highlights of FSP's own words to show it has no regard for people or victims:
Sur le plan national, la FSP représente les intérêts des psychologues dans les domaines de la politique et de l’économie, ainsi qu’auprès de l’administration. La FSP veille aux intérêts de ses membres et les défend activement. La FSP défend les intérêts de ses membres de façon proactive face aux parties prenantes et siège dans les instances pertinentes.
This organisation who openly proclaims not defending victims rights has nonetheless a deontological code of conduct, to which their members are supposed to adhere:
Les membres de la FSP ont obtenu un Master en psychologie dans une université ou une haute école suisse (ou peuvent justifier d'un diplôme équivalent dans une haute école étrangère). Ils s'engagent à suivre régulièrement une formation continue ainsi qu'à respecter les principes éthiques du Code de déontologie.
And behold, a complaint can be filed.
I did file a documented complaint against the psychologists Célia (Schaller) Fleuri, Yvan Rupp and Thierry Gros. Their gross violations of rights and active involvement in kidnapping, endangering the psychological and sexual integrity of children will be described later.
Here comes the part of interest to the expat community.
The FSP denies complaints if foreign individuals do not provide a legal representative in Switzerland. On January 28th 2021 the FSP decided:
Comme vous n'avez pas de domicile en Suisse, nous vous avons notifié par écrit, le 12 octobre 2020, que nous vous accordions un délai supplémentaire au sens de l'art. 6 al. 2 du Règlement de procédure CDD pour désigner un destinataire en Suisse (art. 5 al. 3 du Règlement de procédure CDD). Toutefois, pendant ce délai supplémentaire, vous ne nous avez pas communiqué une adresse en Suisse à laquelle nous aurions pu vous adresser notre courrier en cas d'une ouverture de la plainte. C'est pourquoi, en raison de l'absence de conditions formelles, il n'est pas possible de donner suite à votre plainte.
On 18 March 2021 the FSP decided:
Vous n'avez pas répondu à la demande de désignation d'un député en Suisse dans le délai imparti, ce qui explique pourquoi aucune procédure n'a pu être ouverte.
You read this right. A Swiss psychologist can claim pretty much anything they pretty please and harm a foreigner outside Switzerland. Their deontological committee will only review complaints if you are either in Switzerland, or if you pay for the services of a lawyer in Switzerland. If you have that kind of cash.
Moreover, they claim:
Comme nous ne sommes pas une agence de justice pénale, mais une association professionnelle, nous devrions respecter nos lignes directrices formelles pour ne pas être arbitraires.
Let me rephrase in human language: The FSP will not examine the complaint of a foreigner against a Swiss psychologist who violates every rule in the book, unless that foreigner disposes of the financial ressources to use the services of a lawyer or to have an address in Switzerland. Although as a foreigner you are required to have a lawyer which you have to pay for yourself, as professional organisation they pay for the legal representation of their members. If not, they consider it arbitrary on their accord. And they consider themselves not a judicial agency, but they can take away the title of a psychologist, the right to be psychologist, and fine them up to 25.000 CHF. That is in theory, if they ever decide to open a case against a psychologist.
The FSP as professional and regulatory body of a by law regulated profession it is in violation of:
- article 2 of the universal declaration of human rights. It discriminates based on the geographical and financial situation of the victim, while it is responsible for the deontological integrity of its members.
- the whistleblower's protection measures as defined by the UN Convention against corruption.
- the right to be supplied legal counsel in absence of financial means.
And I could go on. To me this has all the elements for organised crime to flourish.
Of note, these psychologists and the FSP were duly informed of the sexual abuse on my children, and they have chosen to take a role in the kidnapping of my children, and in maintaining them in a situation of sexual and psychological abuse. I've been threatened by all 3 psychologists about the damage they could, and would do, unless I subjected myself to them. I was able to document that these psychologists, while they are seemingly unacquainted, actually work together.
The fact a foreigner has no access (other then through a highly discriminating procedure) to the disciplinary body of the FSP is the reason why no complaint was, nor can be filed against the psychologist Serge de Meuron either.
Each of these four will be documented publicly in separate posts later, with details of their violations of fundamental victim rights and their deontological code.
I'd actually be interested to find out how many psychologists the FSP has scrapped the title of and fined for violations of the deontological code. My guess would be close to 0.
Conclusion: The FSP does not have any regard for victims of wrongdoing by psychologists. The FSP represents the interests of Swiss psychologists, and rejects documented complaints of victims through human rights violations and discrimination. Hence Swiss psychologists can do harm knowingly and freely without any risk... other then the right to truth exercised.
protected in civil court
The Universal declaration of human rights article 19 is about the freedom of opinion and expression.
Swiss psychologists avail themselves, wrongly, of this article in Swiss civil procedures. And judges thank them for their “freedom of opinion and expression”.
This is anchored in Swiss law. Psychologists can but are not required to denounce sexual violence against children. They are not required of anything, and can avail themselves of “thinking”.
Swiss psychologists are (supposed to be) educated and experienced professionals. They are granted credibility by society and the legal system for their opinions. They should be accountable for the harm their opinions create to individuals and/or society when they get it wrong. Especially when they get it wrong on purpose, in full knowledge.
Moreover, as professionals they (should) know to back off when they are confronted with a situation for which they know they do not have the appropriate training, expertise and experience.
I'll explain later how these psychologists mentioned do not have the training, expertise or experience in child sexual abuse, and actually admitted not having them. Nonetheless, they still provided their “expert” opinion, and abusing their claimed “freedom of expression” they are co-responsible in the kidnapping and endangering of children. Not just mine.
But it is all good, because the civil judge accepts it.
protected even in light of explicit criminal law
It seems normal, that a psychologist, who sees many people and cases, has to keep their original notes. Any transcription reduces the information, information which may be pertinent in case of disciplinary complaints, or worse criminal proceedings.
When psychologists write reports, these need to be based on those notes. In keeping the notes it is a way to document and verify whether reports are truthful or not.
Swiss law dictates a psychologist has to keep their original notes for a period of at least 10 years. If notes are not kept, they are liable to criminal charges.
The Centre Neuchatelois de Psychiatrie, CNP, is a state body of at least questionable ethics and praxis. Its psychologists and psychiatrists work for the state. They are responsible for the hardship of many children in a canton deprived of competence in the mental health field. Competent people run away from there due to the awful maffia practises. But that's for another post.
The CNP were fully aware of the sexual violence against my daughter by their maternal grandfather. Notes were taken, recommendations given.
Then, as is praxis with the CNP, a report was filed against the person who dared to denounce sexual violence on children. Me, a foreigner, a stay-at-home dad, denouncing sexual violence on my children by a Swiss grandfather, was being reported to the authorities.
The psychologists knew they were doing wrong, there is written trace evidence to that.
They destroyed their notes, and confirmed they destroyed their notes for the purpose of filing the report!
Their originally filed report at the court was actually missing a signature, which later miraculously turned up on the court document!
Factual evidence showed that many elements in the report was pure organised calumny.
Criminal charges were filed.
The Neuchatel public prosecutor (NPP), despite the Swiss law being explicit, judged that it is OK for a psychologist to destroy the primary evidence, the notes, when filing a report with the authorities.
And, the NPP denied the evidence showing objectively the report is pure calumny.
The NPP dismissed the case.
In doing so, the NPP violated the universal declaration of human rights articles 7 to 11. The NPP also violated victims rights to protection, and the right to truth principle. The NPP protected public servants (CNP) who violate the law, and according to the law should be prosecuted.
In so doing, the judicial system responsible for making sure Swiss state servants respect Swiss law created a judicial truth contrary to the reality, and created jurisprudence that it is OK for psychologists to destroy evidence when they file a report with authorities.
This, in a case of continued and documented sexual violence on children.
What a sorry criminal state: All pedophiles, flock to Switzerland, the eden for child sexual offenders!
I promise you, part 3 is coming!
A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on. This blog gets the proverbial pants on!
information provided as is, without prejudice, without any prejudicial recognition, and with reservation of all rights, expressly without recognition of any Swiss competence which remains contested
for the avoidance of any doubt whatsoever, all information on this blog, such as but not limited to documents and/or audio recordings and/or video recordings and/or pictures mentioned, have been made and/or collected, and published, in the interest of justice and the public at large
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights applies to everything on this blog
the Universal Right to Truth principle applies to everything on this blog