Peter Hug

In connection with the proceedings initiated in 1995 regarding heirless Jewish assets at Swiss banks, Hug was commissioned by the Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs to prepare a report. This report was intended to disclose what happened to the Swiss assets of (predominantly Jewish) citizens of Poland, Hungary, Romania and other 'Eastern States'. Switzerland had offered assets belonging to citizens of these states in return for compensation of Swiss assets lost to mass nationalizations undertaken by their Communist governments. Switzerland had signed Treaties to pursue this aim with Poland in 1949,[2] Hungary in 1950 and Romania in 1951.[3][4]

In the final report, Hug accused former Federal Councilor and Justice Minister Kurt Furgler, who was responsible for implementing these treaties of having advocated for “a bending of the law”. Furgler was accused of having suggested to his colleagues in the Federal Council that, despite the lack of a legal basis to do so, all assets of depositors from states with whom treaties were conducted, with the exception of Poland and Hungary, were to be handed over to a general fund for the support of former World War II refugees or given directly to the Swiss Federation of Jewish Communities. This would have constituted a de facto expropriation, because once the funds were moved and commingled, any existing individual heirs would have had a low chance of retrieving them. In the cases of Poland and Hungary, Hug found that Switzerland did not hand over the list of names of account holders to the respective governments. The Swiss government cited Swiss bank secrecy laws as well as concerns about possible Communist persecution of any heirs to the accounts.[5]

While accepting responsibility to compensate any heirs to the funds transferred to Poland, Hungary and any of the other then-Communist Eastern European governments under the aforementioned treaties, as well as publicize names of account holders, the Federal Council rejected and criticized the specific allegation made against Furgler in a press release.[6]

Hug was later hired by the Independent Commission of Experts Switzerland – World War II (often called the Bergier Commission) to conduct an investigation. This was published in 2002 under the title "Swiss armaments industry and war material trade during the National Socialist period: corporate strategies - market development - political surveillance".[7]

As part of the Swiss government-funded national research program "Relationship Switzerland - South Africa", Hug dealt with the relationship between Switzerland and the South African apartheid government. He wrote a report on the military, armaments industry and nuclear relations between Switzerland and South Africa.[8][9] His findings received international press coverage.[10][11]

Hug came to the conclusion that Swiss companies such as Sulzer supplied important components for South Africa's uranium enrichment, which provided the necessary fissile material for the six atomic bombs produced by South Africa. After the Federal Council ordered a partial blocking of access to relevant files in the Swiss Federal Archives in 2003, in view of the threat of class action lawsuits against Swiss banks by victims of apartheid, Hug gave Swiss newspapers critical interviews on this subject.[12] This blocking of files only restricted Hug's work to a limited extent, since he was also researching relevant files in both government and privately owned South African archives.

Hug strongly criticized Swiss military neutrality regarding the Ukraine War in multiple interviews given in Switzerland. In one he was quoted saying that “Whoever in a typically ‘neutral’ manner, does not distinguish between the aggressor and the attacked declares moral bankruptcy”. He further stated that “In particular, the Swiss commodity trading center, which is benefiting massively from Putin's war and is helping to finance it, naturally sees no problem in remaining ‘neutral’ “.[13]