Add Swiss IT disaster articles and homepage article cards
Created 6 new investigative articles covering Swiss IT failures from 2020-2024: - INSIEME: CHF 116M tax software failure (2020-03) - Swiss E-Voting: Security flaw cancellation (2020-08) - SECO Corruption: CHF 99M contract scandal (2021-02) - Juris X: Zürich's 16-year software odyssey (2022-06) - Swisscom: 8-hour emergency services outage (2024-07) - Credit Suisse: 3,000 applications integration nightmare (2024-11) Added article-card shortcode and CSS for homepage layout. Updated homepage to display all investigations with featured cards. 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
166
content/articles/juris-x-zurich-16-year-odyssey.md
Normal file
166
content/articles/juris-x-zurich-16-year-odyssey.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,166 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
title: "Juris X: Zürich's 16-Year IT Odyssey"
|
||||
subtitle: "How the canton's justice system spent CHF 36 million to keep running 30-year-old software"
|
||||
category: "Investigation"
|
||||
date: 2022-06-10
|
||||
tags: ["Juris X", "Zürich", "Cantonal Government", "Justice System", "IT Failure"]
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## The Numbers
|
||||
|
||||
| Metric | Value |
|
||||
|--------|-------|
|
||||
| Years attempting replacement | 16+ (2008–2024+) |
|
||||
| Failed projects | 2 (original + Juris X) |
|
||||
| Cost of first failed project | CHF 24 million (budget was CHF 8 million) |
|
||||
| Cost of Juris X | CHF 15.6 million |
|
||||
| Cost of replacement (Gina) | CHF 36.5 million |
|
||||
| Annual cost to maintain legacy system | CHF 4.8 million |
|
||||
| Age of current production software | 30+ years |
|
||||
|
||||
## The Legacy System
|
||||
|
||||
Somewhere in the Canton of Zürich's justice infrastructure, software from the early 1990s continues to run. It manages case files for the Justizvollzug—the justice enforcement system handling prisons, probation, and related functions.
|
||||
|
||||
This software predates:
|
||||
- The World Wide Web (public launch: 1991)
|
||||
- Windows 95
|
||||
- The Euro
|
||||
- Google
|
||||
- The iPhone
|
||||
- The entire careers of most current IT staff
|
||||
|
||||
It still runs. Nobody fully understands why. Or how.
|
||||
|
||||
## The First Attempt (2008–2016)
|
||||
|
||||
The Zürich Justizdirektion recognized the problem early. In 2008, they began a project to replace the aging system.
|
||||
|
||||
### The Original Budget
|
||||
CHF 8 million. Reasonable for a cantonal case management system.
|
||||
|
||||
### The Final Cost
|
||||
CHF 24 million. Three times the original budget.
|
||||
|
||||
### The Outcome
|
||||
In summer 2016, the project was cancelled. Nothing was delivered. The 30-year-old software continued running.
|
||||
|
||||
Director at the time: Jacqueline Fehr (SP), who inherited the project and stopped it before costs could escalate further. This was, in retrospect, the right call.
|
||||
|
||||
## Enter Juris X (2020)
|
||||
|
||||
After the first failure, the canton tried again. Contractor Abraxas proposed a new solution: **Juris X**.
|
||||
|
||||
### The Promise
|
||||
A modern case management system. Proper architecture. Reasonable timeline. Lessons learned from the first failure.
|
||||
|
||||
### The Price
|
||||
CHF 15.6 million—double the original quote, but still less than the first project's final cost.
|
||||
|
||||
### The Process
|
||||
The Regierungsrat approved the project. Development began. Milestones were set.
|
||||
|
||||
## The Slow-Motion Collapse
|
||||
|
||||
{{< irony >}}
|
||||
In 2024, Abraxas delivered the news everyone dreaded but nobody admitted they expected:
|
||||
|
||||
> "Important milestones were not reached and agreed delivery dates were not met."
|
||||
|
||||
The software didn't meet requirements. Years of work. Millions of francs. Nothing usable.
|
||||
{{< /irony >}}
|
||||
|
||||
## "Scheitern mit Ansage"
|
||||
|
||||
The parliamentary Geschäftsprüfungskommission (oversight commission) reviewed the debacle. Their assessment was damning:
|
||||
|
||||
> "Scheitern mit Ansage" — Failure foretold.
|
||||
|
||||
Commission president Jean-Philippe Pinto summarized the problems:
|
||||
|
||||
> "Too complex, too big, too high ambitions."
|
||||
|
||||
The commission found it "incomprehensible" that the Regierungsrat had held onto the troubled project for so long. Warning signs were visible for years. Nobody acted.
|
||||
|
||||
## The Third Attempt: Gina
|
||||
|
||||
In August 2024, the Regierungsrat awarded a new contract. Vendor: Glaux Group. Product: "Gina."
|
||||
|
||||
### The Cost
|
||||
CHF 36.5 million. More than double Juris X. Four times the original 2008 budget.
|
||||
|
||||
### The Reaction
|
||||
Parliamentary alarm. Public criticism. Questions about why the canton keeps failing at the same task.
|
||||
|
||||
### The Procurement
|
||||
The contract was awarded "freihändig"—without competitive bidding. The Justizdirektion argued urgency: they couldn't wait for a full procurement process while running 30-year-old software.
|
||||
|
||||
This argument might be more compelling if they hadn't spent 16 years getting to this point.
|
||||
|
||||
## The Maintenance Trap
|
||||
|
||||
While Gina is developed, the legacy system must continue operating. The canton approved CHF 4.8 million just to keep the old software running and maintained.
|
||||
|
||||
{{< irony title="The Sunk Cost Spiral" >}}
|
||||
Total spending on replacing a system that still isn't replaced:
|
||||
- First project: CHF 24 million (cancelled)
|
||||
- Juris X: CHF 15.6 million (failed)
|
||||
- Gina: CHF 36.5 million (in progress)
|
||||
- Legacy maintenance: CHF 4.8 million/year
|
||||
|
||||
**Running total: CHF 76+ million**
|
||||
|
||||
For comparison: the original 2008 budget was CHF 8 million.
|
||||
{{< /irony >}}
|
||||
|
||||
## The Pattern
|
||||
|
||||
Zürich's Juris X saga exemplifies Swiss public IT dysfunction:
|
||||
|
||||
### Optimistic Planning
|
||||
Initial budgets assume everything goes right. Nothing ever goes right.
|
||||
|
||||
### Scope Creep
|
||||
Requirements expand. Complexity grows. Timelines slip.
|
||||
|
||||
### Contractor Dependency
|
||||
The canton lacks internal IT capability. They depend entirely on external vendors who have misaligned incentives.
|
||||
|
||||
### Political Paralysis
|
||||
Cancelling a project is politically painful. Continuing a failing project is politically easier—until it isn't.
|
||||
|
||||
### No Learning
|
||||
Each failed project is treated as unique. The same mistakes repeat.
|
||||
|
||||
## The Legacy System Paradox
|
||||
|
||||
The 30-year-old software keeps running because:
|
||||
- Nobody fully understands it
|
||||
- The people who built it are retired or dead
|
||||
- Documentation is incomplete or missing
|
||||
- Modern developers don't want to touch it
|
||||
- It somehow still works
|
||||
|
||||
{{< conclusion >}}
|
||||
The Canton of Zürich has spent 16 years and over CHF 76 million trying to replace case management software. The software remains unreplaced. The justice system runs on code older than many of its employees.
|
||||
|
||||
This is not a story about technology failing. The technology to build case management systems is well understood. Thousands of organizations worldwide have done it successfully.
|
||||
|
||||
This is a story about institutional failure—about governance structures that cannot deliver, oversight that doesn't oversee, and a political system that finds it easier to continue failing than to fundamentally reform how it approaches IT.
|
||||
|
||||
The 30-year-old system will keep running. The committees will keep meeting. The millions will keep flowing. And someday—perhaps—Gina will finally work.
|
||||
|
||||
Or perhaps we'll be writing about Juris Z in 2030.
|
||||
{{< /conclusion >}}
|
||||
|
||||
<div class="sources">
|
||||
|
||||
### Sources
|
||||
|
||||
- [NZZ: IT-Flop in Zürich](https://www.nzz.ch/meinung/it-flop-in-zuerich-wenn-behoerden-digitalisieren-geht-es-zu-oft-schief-ld.1772142) ([archive.org](https://web.archive.org/web/20231230011015/https://www.nzz.ch/meinung/it-flop-in-zuerich-wenn-behoerden-digitalisieren-geht-es-zu-oft-schief-ld.1772142) | [archive.is](https://archive.ph/20231228163615/https://www.nzz.ch/meinung/it-flop-in-zuerich-wenn-behoerden-digitalisieren-geht-es-zu-oft-schief-ld.1772142))
|
||||
- [Inside-IT: Scheitern mit Ansage](https://www.inside-it.ch/scheitern-mit-ansage-heftige-kritik-aus-der-politik-fuer-zuercher-it-projekt-juris-x-20240308) ([archive.org](https://web.archive.org/web/20240327071646/https://www.inside-it.ch/scheitern-mit-ansage-heftige-kritik-aus-der-politik-fuer-zuercher-it-projekt-juris-x-20240308))
|
||||
- [Tages-Anzeiger: Debakel für Zürcher Justizdirektion](https://www.tagesanzeiger.ch/debakel-fuer-zuercher-justizdirektion-it-projekt-gescheitert-ueber-30-jahre-alte-software-wird-nicht-erneuert-884320881718)
|
||||
- [NZZ: IT-Debakel in Justizdirektion - Kanton Zürich entscheidet sich für neue Software](https://www.nzz.ch/zuerich/it-debakel-in-justizdirektion-kanton-zuerich-entscheidet-sich-fuer-neue-software-ld.1845484)
|
||||
- [NZZ: Freihändige Vergabe und explodierende Kosten](https://www.nzz.ch/zuerich/zwei-flops-scharfe-kritik-und-ein-positiver-pruefbericht-die-odyssee-eines-it-projekts-das-die-zuercher-behoerden-schier-zur-verzweiflung-gebracht-hat-ld.1891714)
|
||||
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user