A Swiss wind instrument repairman is set to spend ten days behind bars after refusing to pay a fine imposed for what authorities deemed an “offensive” Facebook comment about biological sex.
Emanuel Brünisholz, from Burgdorf in the canton of Bern, was convicted under Switzerland’s anti-discrimination laws after responding to a December 2022 post by Swiss National Council member Andreas Glarner.
In his reply, he wrote: “If you dig up LGBTQI people after 200 years, you’ll only find men and women based on their skeletons. Everything else is a mental illness promoted through the curriculum.”
The comment, which stressed the immutability of biological sex, triggered complaints from activists who accused him of incitement to hatred under Article 261bis of the Swiss Criminal Code. The provision, originally passed to prevent racial and religious hate speech, was broadened in 2020 to cover “sexual identities.”
Brünisholz was questioned by police in August 2023, and later found guilty of “publicly belittling” LGBT(QI) people. He was fined 500 Swiss francs (around €535), convertible into a ten-day prison term if unpaid. After he appealed, a regional court not only upheld the conviction but added a further 600-franc fee.
Declaring that he would not pay a penalty for expressing a scientific fact, Brünisholz announced on social media: “It’s happening. On 2 December I’m going to prison for 10 days!” He also posted the official summons from the Bernese Office of Justice Execution confirming his prison transfer.
The case has drawn fierce criticism online. Commentator Daniel Stricker accused Swiss media of hypocrisy, writing: “And the Swiss mainstream media whines about free speech restrictions in far-off America … Total silence on this case.”
Critics argue the conviction shows how Article 261bis is being weaponised to silence dissent on gender ideology, while ignoring biological evidence. The debate is likely to intensify, with parliament considering further amendments to extend protections to “gender identity”—a move opponents warn would entrench censorship.
