On 5 June 2005, the Swiss people accepted, by 58 % of the vote, the federal act on registered partnership for same-sex couples (PartA). With this vote, Switzerland became the first country in the world to introduce a legal status for homosexual couples through a national popular referendum.
The act, passed by Parliament on 18 June 2004, created a status distinct from marriage: it granted same-sex couples rights in inheritance, taxation, pensions and residence, but explicitly excluded adoption and medically assisted reproduction. Conservative and religious circles, led by the Federal Democratic Union (FDU), launched a referendum.
The campaign pitted two readings against each other. For the Yes camp, the aim was to end legal discrimination while offering a measured solution clearly distinct from marriage. For the No camp, this « disguised marriage » was a first step toward gay marriage and adoption, and a threat to the traditional family.
Turnout, at 56.5 %, was well above the average of the time — a sign of the ballot's strong symbolic charge. The act came into force on 1 January 2007.
▲ Cantons that accepted The act was strongly endorsed in the French-speaking cantons (Vaud, Geneva, Neuchâtel, Jura), in Basel-City, Zurich and most urban cantons, where the Yes often exceeded 60 %. | ▼ Cantons that rejected The No prevailed in several conservative Catholic and central-Swiss cantons (notably Appenzell Inner Rhodes, Uri, Valais and Ticino). As this was a referendum on a federal law, only the popular majority was required. |
Actors and personalities
▲ Yes camp • Federal Council and parliamentary majority (act passed on 18 June 2004) • Social Democrats, Greens, FDP and Liberals broad support • Part of the Christian Democrats moderate support for the compromise • LGBT organisations (Pink Cross, LOS) and rights groups | ▼ No camp • Federal Democratic Union (FDU) initiator of the referendum • Conservative wing of the SVP main political relay • Evangelical and conservative Catholic circles opposition on principle • « For marriage and family » committees against a status seen as a rival |
Arguments and verdicts
▲ Arguments FOR (Yes camp) End a legal discrimination « Same-sex couples must have a legal framework for inheritance, taxation, pensions and residence. » — Yes camp (SP, Greens, LGBT organisations), 2005 ✓ Argument confirmed The PartA came into force on 1 January 2007 and was used by thousands of couples, who obtained the concrete rights sought (inheritance, second pillar, family reunification). Source : Confederation / arcinfo — « Registered partnership proves popular » Secure couples' everyday life « The partnership will bring tangible protection: medical decisions, residence rights for a foreign partner, pensions. » — Yes camp, 2005 ✓~ Partly confirmed These rights were granted, but differences with marriage remained: facilitated naturalisation, adoption and assisted reproduction stayed excluded until the reforms of 2018 and 2021. Source : FOJ — registered partnership A measured solution, which is not marriage « This status is deliberately distinct from marriage and excludes adoption: it does not overturn family law. » — Yes camp, 2005 ✗~ Partly refuted Presented as a lasting point of balance, the PartA was only a stage. Stepchild adoption arrived in 2018, then « marriage for all » — with adoption and assisted reproduction — in 2021. Source : Federal Chancellery — vote of 26 September 2021 | ▼ Arguments AGAINST (No camp) A first step toward gay marriage and adoption « This partnership is only a stage: it will inevitably pave the way to gay marriage and adoption. » — No camp (FDU, conservative SVP), 2005 ✓ Argument confirmed The prediction came true: stepchild adoption was allowed in 2018, and « marriage for all », including adoption and access to assisted reproduction, was accepted at the ballot on 26 September 2021 by 64.1 %. Source : Federal Chancellery — « marriage for all » 2021 A threat to marriage and the traditional family « Recognising same-sex couples will weaken the institution of marriage and the family. » — No camp, 2005 ✗ Argument refuted No such effect has been documented. Trends in marriage and birth rates follow independent long-term patterns, with no established link to the recognition of same-sex couples. Source : FSO — population and family statistics |
Affiches de campagne (35)
Factual record
2 Confirmed | 1 Partly confirmed | 1 Partly refuted | 1 Refuted |
| ✓ | A concrete and widely used legal recognition Coming into force on 1 January 2007, the PartA granted same-sex couples real rights in inheritance, pensions and residence, taken up by thousands of couples. Source : Confederation — registered partnership |
| ✓ | No weakening of traditional marriage observed The fear of family breakdown did not materialise: trends in marriage and birth rates stem from long-term patterns with no established link to the PartA. Source : FSO — family statistics |
| ~ | A stage that became a springboard to full equality Presented as distinct from marriage, the PartA ultimately paved the way: stepchild adoption in 2018, then marriage for all with adoption and assisted reproduction in 2021 — proving the No camp right on this point. Source : Federal Chancellery — 2021 vote |
The vote of 5 June 2005 stands as a milestone: for the first time in the world, a people directly granted a legal status to same-sex couples. The clear result — 58 % Yes, with high turnout — gave this recognition a rare democratic legitimacy.
In hindsight, both camps were partly right. The Yes camp achieved its aim: concrete legal recognition, without the opposing fears about the traditional family coming true.
But the No camp had been right on a central point: the partnership was only a stage. Stepchild adoption (2018) and then marriage for all (2021), including adoption and assisted reproduction, extended a dynamic the opponents had predicted.
The overall verdict is that of a founding reform: its immediate benefits materialised, its feared risks did not, and its long-term trajectory confirmed that it was the first step on a wider march toward equality.