Cooling-off Period for Former Army Chief Thomas Süssli: DDPS Imposes One-Year Defense Industry Ban

Author: Tobias Gasser
Source: SRF – Swiss Radio and Television
Publication Date: 28.11.2025
Summary Reading Time: 4 minutes

Executive Summary

Thomas Süssli, departing Chief of the Swiss Armed Forces after six years in office, is subject to a twelve-month cooling-off period prohibiting him from accepting mandates with defense companies that significantly benefited from DDPS contracts in 2025. This regulation is exceptional: The federal government only agrees to such restrictions in exceptional cases, despite international anti-corruption bodies like GRECO calling for stricter rules. Süssli nevertheless plans board mandates, consulting assignments, and speaking engagements – a decision will not be made until March 2026. The case exemplarily demonstrates the tension between transparency requirements and economic freedom for top federal administration executives.

Critical Key Questions

Where does legitimate interest protection end – and where does excessive restriction of economic freedom begin?
The cooling-off period protects against conflicts of interest but infringes on fundamental rights. Why is there no legal basis that balances transparency and freedom?
Why doesn't the cooling-off period apply to the Intelligence Service Chief, even though his knowledge is highly sensitive?
The DDPS sees no reputational risk with Christian Dussey – an assessment that appears questionable given geopolitical tensions and cybersecurity concerns.
What signal does the selective application of cooling-off periods send for trust in state institutions?
When rules only apply selectively, an impression of arbitrary governance emerges – with potentially erosive effects on federal administration credibility.

Scenario Analysis: Future Perspectives

Short-term (1 year):
Süssli will accept board mandates in non-defense sectors (start-ups, technology, leadership). The cooling-off period is unlikely to generate much media attention as long as no violations become known. Political pressure on the Federal Council to standardize cooling-off rules remains low – GRECO recommendations are postponed.

Medium-term (5 years):
A scandal case (e.g., a top executive moving to the defense lobby) could reignite the debate. Switzerland would then come under pressure to introduce legal minimum standards – similar to EU regulations. In parallel, an informal talent market could emerge: former executives advising indirectly through think tanks or consulting firms without direct defense contracts.

Long-term (10–20 years):
The professionalization of the defense industry (AI-powered weapons systems, cybersecurity) makes cooling-off periods increasingly complex and less effective. Switzerland could – like France or Germany – create an independent ethics committee to review transitions. Alternatively, brain drain threatens: top executives avoid public service if career options are too restricted.

Main Summary

a) Core Topic & Context

Thomas Süssli is leaving army leadership at the end of 2025 after six years without pension entitlement and plans mandates in the private sector. The DDPS has included a twelve-month cooling-off period in his employment contract, excluding activities for defense companies with current DDPS contracts. The regulation is atypical in the Swiss federal administration and raises questions about consistency and transparency – particularly since Süssli's Intelligence Service colleague Christian Dussey has no such restriction.

b) Key Facts & Figures

Cooling-off period: 12 months, effective from end of 2025
Companies affected: Those that "significantly benefited from DDPS defense contracts in 2025" (no revenue threshold defined)
Süssli's plans: Board mandates (start-ups, large corporations), speaking engagements (geopolitics, technology, leadership); sole proprietorship registered from 01.01.2026
Decision: Final only by end of March 2026
Cooling-off periods in federal government: Only four documented cases until 2019; discretionary wording in federal law
GRECO recommendation: Binding rules for top executives requested, rejected by Federal Council so far (freedom of occupation)

c) Stakeholders & Affected Parties

Thomas Süssli: Seeking board mandates, must avoid defense sector
DDPS/Viola Amherd: Defends cooling-off period as corruption prevention
Defense industry: Loses potential advisor with strategic insider knowledge
Federal administration: Under pressure to standardize regulations
Public/media: Demands transparency regarding "revolving door phenomena"
GRECO (Council of Europe): Urges legal standardization

d) Opportunities & Risks

Opportunities:

Governance precedent: The cooling-off period could become best practice for future top executives.
Trust building: If Süssli acts in compliance, it strengthens DDPS credibility.
Innovation stimulus: Süssli's engagement in start-ups could promote technology transfer – without defense connection.

Risks:

Legal uncertainty: The definition of "significantly benefiting companies" is vague and contentious.
Unequal treatment: Dussey's lack of cooling-off period appears arbitrary and undermines rule principles.
Deterrent effect: Overly strict cooling-off periods could deter qualified executives from public service.
Circumvention strategies: Süssli could work indirectly (through consulting firms) for defense corporations – difficult to monitor.

e) Action Relevance

For Decision-makers:

Legislature: Examine whether legal cooling-off periods (with clear thresholds and compensation) increase transparency without disproportionately restricting freedoms.
DDPS: Clarify why Christian Dussey has no cooling-off period – otherwise credibility loss threatens.
Media/civil society: Vigilance regarding Süssli's future mandates – particularly indirect defense connections.

Time pressure: Low. Süssli decides only in March 2026. Until then, opportunity exists for political clarification.

Quality Assurance & Fact-checking

Cooling-off period duration: ✅ Confirmed by DDPS statements in article
Comparison cases: ✅ Nicoletta della Valle (Fedpol), Marie-Gabrielle Ineichen-Fleisch (Seco) documented
GRECO recommendation: ✅ Council of Europe demands binding rules (Federal Council response 2019 documented)
Christian Dussey: ✅ No cooling-off period according to DDPS
Definition "significantly": [⚠️ To verify] – no official revenue threshold stated

Verification status: ✅ Facts checked on 28.11.2025

Supplementary Research

GRECO (Group of States Against Corruption): Evaluation Report on Switzerland, 2023
→ Recommends binding "cooling-off periods" for executive staff.
Federal Personnel Ordinance (BPV), Art. 21a:
→ Discretionary wording for cooling-off periods; no obligation for all top executives.
Swissinfo: «Revolving doors in Swiss politics» (2022)
→ Analysis of known cases (Leuthard, Leuenberger, Ineichen-Fleisch) and criticism of lack of regulation.

Bibliography

Primary Source:
SRF: No contracts from the defense industry for the former army chief

Supplementary Sources:

GRECO – Council of Europe: Evaluation Report Switzerland (2023)
Federal Personnel Ordinance (BPV), Art. 21a – admin.ch
Swissinfo: «Revolving doors in Swiss politics» (2022)