People keep quoting Swiss law at you, as if that has any bearing on what the English word “rape” means in common parlance.

I would say in English speaking countries, rape means “non-consensual sexual intercourse”. This is in spite of the fact that the UK also requires the rapist to penetrate the victim.

In normal speech, and not a court of law, people do routinely say, for instance, “the female office manager raped the new male apprentice in the store cupboard” - even though the victim was the one penetrating the rapist. In the UK, the female office manager in this instance would be tried for sexual assault, not rape, although the punishment would be the same.

I think you’re right that the headline would mislead many readers here, given that native English speakers would, in normal speech, say that someone who non-consensually fingered someone (I assume that’s what this guy did) committed sexual assault, rather than rape. But because of how laws define things, penetration occurred so this is legally considered rape in Switzerland.

However whoever writes a law does not get to dictate what the “real meanings” of words are. The fact is that words are often ambiguous, and do not have a clear meaning for all people. In this case, the authors of the article must have known that, and by choosing not to clear up the ambiguity in the headline, I have to wonder if they were either trying to get clicks, or trying to spread a racist narrative.