A landmark decision by Switzerland’s Federal Supreme Court has opened a new legal route for migrant domestic workers who say they were exploited by diplomats, limiting the protection previously provided by diplomatic immunity in employment disputes.
The ruling followed a case brought by Filipino domestic workers who had been employed by diplomats at the Pakistani Mission in Geneva. The workers alleged that they had experienced years of exploitation, including unpaid wages and abusive working conditions.
Among them was Virginia, a Filipino domestic worker who spent nearly two decades working for the Pakistani Mission. She and three other workers filed their case in 2021, challenging their former employers despite concerns that diplomatic immunity could prevent the claims from being heard.
The workers eventually received a significant development in September 2025, when the Swiss Federal Supreme Court ruled that diplomatic immunity could not be used to prevent domestic workers from bringing labour-related civil claims against their diplomatic employers.
The decision has been described by labour organisations and lawyers as an important development for migrant domestic workers, particularly those whose residence and work permits are connected to diplomatic households.
For Virginia, the ruling represented more than a legal development. She said it gave her a sense that the years she spent challenging her former employer had not been wasted.
She first learned about the decision through a newspaper report shared on a Facebook group used by Filipinos living in Geneva. After seeing the headline, she searched for confirmation and later received an email from her lawyer confirming that the court had ruled in her favour on the issue of diplomatic immunity.
“I’m happy. Really happy,” she said, expressing hope that the decision would also improve conditions for other workers in similar situations.
Virginia arrived in Switzerland in 1999 when she was 22 and a mother of two. A friend had told her about an opportunity to work as domestic staff for the Pakistani Mission.
Her employment contract promised a monthly salary of 1,200 Swiss francs, an amount she considered far higher than what she could earn at home in the Philippines.
But after arriving in Geneva, she said she discovered that the reality of the job differed significantly from what she had expected.
According to Virginia, she was required to work for the mission several days a week without receiving a salary for that work. She had to find additional employment elsewhere to earn enough money to support herself and her children.
She nevertheless remained at the mission and continued working there for almost 20 years.
Her duties included cleaning and preparing for official functions. She said she sometimes worked late into the night when diplomatic events were being held, returning home in cold and snowy conditions.
Her sister later joined her at the mission and was employed under similar conditions.
The situation eventually came to the attention of Swiss authorities after Virginia’s sister became unwell. A doctor reportedly raised concerns about possible exploitation after learning about the conditions under which the women were working.
Virginia said the workers were subsequently pressured to sign documents that appeared to show they had received the wages required under their contracts. She and her sister refused to sign the documents, saying they did not accurately reflect their working conditions.
Virginia was later dismissed by her employer through a WhatsApp message.
After almost two decades at the mission, she said she found the dismissal particularly difficult.
“I worked for them for nearly 20 years. I’m 48 now. That’s nearly half my life. But just like that they dismissed me,” she said.
The workers subsequently brought their claims to court with support from the Geneva-based SIT trade union.
Their decision to speak publicly about their experiences also brought criticism and online abuse. One of the workers involved in the case, identified under a changed name, showed messages that she said had been sent by employers and their spouses. Some allegedly referred to the women simply as domestic servants and emphasised their dependence on their employers for residence and work permits.
The lengthy legal battle also affected Virginia personally. She described experiencing severe stress before court hearings and difficulties sleeping, while the prolonged proceedings lasted for almost five years.
The Swiss ruling has wider implications because diplomatic immunity has historically made it difficult for domestic workers employed by diplomats to pursue legal claims.
Diplomatic immunity exists to protect diplomats from legal interference that could prevent them from carrying out their official duties. However, labour rights organisations have argued that it can leave domestic workers vulnerable when their employers misuse their diplomatic status.
The Swiss decision is part of a wider pattern of courts examining the limits of diplomatic immunity in cases involving alleged exploitation.
In 2022, the UK Supreme Court ruled that diplomatic immunity did not protect a Saudi diplomat from a domestic worker’s allegations of modern slavery and trafficking. A separate UK case later resulted in compensation being awarded to a Filipino domestic worker who had been exploited by a foreign envoy.
Virginia’s lawyer, Raphaël Jakob, said the Swiss ruling was broader because it did not make the removal of immunity dependent on proving that the circumstances met a particular threshold for modern slavery.
According to Jakob, the Swiss decision means that immunity does not apply to this type of civil employment claim regardless of the seriousness of the alleged labour violations.
The Geneva-based SIT trade union also welcomed the decision, describing it as an important development for domestic workers employed by diplomats.
Swiss authorities have also taken other measures following the case. Paola Ceresetti, a counsellor at the Swiss Mission responsible for matters involving domestic employees in diplomatic households, said the Pakistani Mission’s privilege to recruit domestic staff from abroad had been permanently withdrawn.
She also said Switzerland’s rules governing private household employees working for diplomatic missions and international organisations were being reviewed to reflect the Federal Supreme Court’s ruling.
However, the court decision does not automatically resolve Virginia’s claim for unpaid wages and other compensation.
Her lawyer said a final judgment is still required before the workers can move towards enforcing their financial claims.
The Pakistani Mission in Geneva and its legal representatives did not respond to requests for comment.
For Virginia, the legal battle remains unfinished, but the Supreme Court ruling has already changed what she believes is possible.
After years of feeling powerless in the face of diplomatic status, she said she eventually found the courage to confront her former employer directly.
“I had never spoken to him like that — ever. But I did it. I stood up for myself,” she said.
The case has therefore become about more than compensation. It has also highlighted the difficulties faced by migrant domestic workers whose immigration status can leave them dependent on powerful employers, while the Swiss ruling has established an important legal precedent for bringing employment-related claims against diplomats.