Weltwoche author Alex Baur wrote an article about whistleblowers in connection with the Hildebrand affair. In a short paragraph, he takes up the case of Rudolf Elmer, a former employee of Bank Julius Baer in the Cayman Islands who became known as a whistleblower and Wikileaks informant. He describes Rudolf Elmer as a data thief and writes that Elmer tried to blackmail Bank Julius Baer with this data.

The Press Council considers the terms "thief" and "blackmailer" to be barely admissible in this specific case, as they are not used in their legal but in their colloquial meaning. On the other hand, Weltwoche does not point out that the proceedings against Elmer are still ongoing and that he continues to deny the accusations made against him. The Press Council considers this omission to be a violation of point 3 of the "Declaration of Duties and Rights of Journalists" with regard to hearings in the event of serious allegations. It is true that the allegations are not new and a hearing was therefore not mandatory. However, Weltwoche should at least have mentioned Elmer's denial.

 

 
According to the Swiss Press Council, Weltwoche violated its duty to tell the truth in an article about alleged abuses of asylum law and omitted information that would have been important for readers to understand the context. In addition, the people concerned were not able to comment. A complaint from lawyers of asylum seekers was partially upheld, as the SDA quoted a press release from the Press Council on Tuesday. In the article "Fluchtgründe ab Fliessband" ("Reasons for flight off the assembly line") from June 28, 2007, Weltwoche denounced asylum abuses based on two examples, both of which were presented as prototypical for the systematic abuse of Swiss asylum law. An Ethiopian asylum seeker was granted asylum in May 2007 after his application for asylum in 2004 and his reconsideration application in 2005 had been rejected. In the opinion of the Press Council, these undisputed facts were not sufficient to prove the abuse at least alleged by the magazine.
According to the article, the reasons for flight were adapted to the changed practice of the Asylum Appeals Commission in 2005, according to which conscientious objectors from Eritrea are now generally granted asylum. According to the Press Council, the author should have explained why the authorities deviated from their original assessment in the individual case. According to the Press Council, Weltwoche would have been obliged to "provide the readership with additional information on the generalizable abuse of asylum law described".
Weltwoche also failed to obtain an official statement from the responsible authority. The "various voices from the administration" quoted were not sufficient. The other parties concerned were also unable to comment. Weltwoche claims that lawyers and the accused asylum seekers could not be reached for comment despite extensive efforts.