Does the public trust the institutions of defence and security to tackle the issue of bribery and corruption in their establishments?
Switzerland score: NS/100
The public view the defence establishment as entirely indifferent to corruption within it, or as clearly corrupt, without the political will to tackle the problem.
The public view is that bribery and corruption are not, according to official rhetoric, acceptable to the defence establishment, but there is a widely-held belief that this is just that: rhetoric, and not seriously intended.
The public view is that bribery and corruption, though not acceptable to the defence establishment, is insufficiently addressed by the measures in place to tackle the problem.
This indicator is not scored. Please discuss conditions in the country context related to good practice (Score 4).
The public view is that there is a clear commitment from the defence establishment that bribery and corruption are not acceptable and must be prosecuted, and that their efforts to tackle the problem are sincere and effective.
This indicator is not assigned a score in the GDI. There is no specific polling available on the question of how the defence establishment’s commitment is perceived by the general population. However, the Swiss military has historically been perceived in the federal structures as one of the truly Swiss institutions. The conscription system also ensures that an important segment of the (mainly male) population has been part of the military at some point in their life. 66% of the population in 2019 indicated they were “proud” or “somewhat proud” of the militia system (N.B. the question included “Politics” and is not solely about the military) . Polling is only available for the population’s general trust in the institution. The Swiss military is generally well trusted. On a 10 point scale, it averaged 6.6 (where 1 is “no trust” and 10 is “fully trusted”). This is still below other institutions like the police, the judiciary, the Federal Council, or the Federal Assembly. However, there was considerable variation depending on political preferences . This level of trust is confirmed by other polling . Although trust in the institution is very likely to correlate to a certain extent with the trust in the effectiveness to combat corruption within these institutions, it is not sufficient to score this question. Especially considering that specific questions about less trusted institutions related to arms trade would probably yield less favourable opinions.
 “Credit Suisse Sorgenbarometer 2019 – Aufgabe nicht erfüllt? Reformstau, Führungslosigkeit und die Erwartung einer Wirtschaftkrise hinterlassen Spuren,” Credit Suisse, and gfs.bern, 2019, accessed 7 March 2020, https://www.credit-suisse.com/media/assets/corporate/docs/about-us/responsibility/worry-barometer/schlussbericht-credit-suisse-sorgenbarometer-2019.pdf.
 Stefano De Rosa, Thomas Ferst, Mauro Giovanoli, Eva Moehlecke de Baseggio, Thomas Reiss, Andrea Rinaldo, Olivia Schneider, and Jennifer Victoria Scurrell, “Sicherheit 2019 – Aussen-, Sicherheits- Und Verteidigungspolitische Meinungsbildung Im Trend,” ETH Zürichm, 2019, 104, https://css.ethz.ch/content/dam/ethz/special-interest/gess/cis/center-for-securities-studies/pdfs/Si2019.pdf.
 “Credit Suisse Sorgenbarometer 2019 – Aufgabe nicht erfüllt? Reformstau, Führungslosigkeit und die Erwartung einer Wirtschaftkrise hinterlassen Spuren,” Credit Suisse, and gfs.bern, 2019, accessed 7 March 2020, 15, https://www.credit-suisse.com/media/assets/corporate/docs/about-us/responsibility/worry-barometer/schlussbericht-credit-suisse-sorgenbarometer-2019.pdf.
Compare scores by country
Please view this page on a larger screen for the full stats.
|Bosnia and Herzegovina||NS|
|United Arab Emirates||NS|