Swiss People's Party (SVP), President Toni Brunner holds up a paper during a news conference on the launch of a public opinion poll on asylum and the policy on foreigners in Bern July 27, 2010. The paper reads: "Which policy on foreigners do you want?"
Last week, a pamphlet arrived through the mailbox of every Swiss household. It blamed the country's immigrant population for a host of societal problems, including welfare abuse, a rising crime rate and an inability to integrate into Swiss culture. The pamphlet contained a survey asking the recipients what measures should be taken to rid Switzerland of immigrants — both legal and illegal — who break the law.
Even in a country known for its level-headedness and neutrality, immigration remains a divisive topic in Switzerland. Last week's brochure was distributed by the populist Swiss People's Party (SVP) ahead of a Nov. 28 nationwide initiative on whether foreigners who commit a crime in Switzerland should be deported after serving their prison sentences.
The vote represents the culmination of a campaign launched by the party in 2007 known as the "black sheep campaign" after SVP posters that showed three white sheep kicking a black sheep out of Switzerland. The poster sparked widespread accusations of racism at the time, but the SVP insisted it accurately conveyed its message: that foreigners who abuse Swiss hospitality should be thrown out.
Not surprisingly, the most recent pamphlet — and the upcoming vote — have reopened the immigration controversy. "[The SVP] are discriminatory and irresponsible," says Balthasar Glaettli, director of Solidarity without Borders (SOSF), a Swiss NGO that protects foreigners' rights.
Not so, says the SVP. The party says that a disproportionate number of criminals in Swiss prisons are foreigners and that "the Swiss have the right to feel safe in our own country." According to figures provided by the Justice Department, three out of four prisoners are foreign. However, some legal experts dispute the SVP's interpretation of that figure, arguing that in Switzerland foreigners are seen as "flight risks" and are therefore more likely to be sent to prison than locals.
The upcoming vote comes exactly a year after the approval of another SVP initiative that banned the construction of minarets. After collecting over 200,000 signatures — 100,000 are required to launch a vote on a constitutional amendment — the SVP presented the immigration proposal to the parliament. The legislators have the right to nullify public initiatives if they are deemed incompatible with international or Swiss law.
But despite concerns that the SVP measure violates a law stating that people can't be deported to countries where they might face persecution, the Swiss parliament allowed the proposal to be brought to a public vote because it had twice the required number of signatures, showing wide popular support. But the legislature also created its own proposal, which will be voted on along with the SVP version. That version restricts deportation to immigrants who commit only the most serious crimes, such as murder, rape and armed robbery. It stresses, however, that expulsions can't violate national or international law.
The SVP claims that the government's counter-proposal is too lenient because it opens up the possibility of appeals against deportation. The SVP's own initiative calls for automatic expulsion of all criminals without the right of appeal, including those convicted of "lighter" infractions not covered under the government proposal, such as drug dealing, burglary and abuse of social and welfare benefits. "Switzerland can't become the land of milk and honey for foreign criminals," SVP legislator Walter Wobmann argued during the parliamentary debate over the initiative.
Opponents of the measure say that both the SVP initiative and the government counter-proposal are unnecessary because existing legislation is sufficient. Under the law as it stands, a judge can decide to deport a foreign criminal — regardless of the legality of his stay in the country — but some are never expelled because they file repeated appeals. Also, many stay in Swiss prisons because their repatriation would violate the international law stating that no person can be sent back to a country where their life might be endangered.
Another difference, SOSF's Glaettli says, is that under the current law, expulsion of criminals is optional, while the SVP proposal would make it mandatory. Switzerland's Federal Migration Office estimates that, should the government counter-proposal pass, the current 350-400 annual criminal deportations could double; if the SVP initiative passes, the figure could increase fourfold.
Marc Spescha, a Zurich lawyer specializing in the rights of immigrants, says he hopes the government counter-proposal should be the one to get more votes "because it is consistent with international law," while acceptance of the SVP version "would be an embarrassment."
Even so, there are already some signs that the majority of Swiss voters would favor the SVP proposal. A poll conducted earlier this year by a local newspaper in two cantons (political entities equivalent to states in the U.S.) in central Switzerland indicated that 68% of respondents favor a tougher law. And in an ongoing online survey launched by a women's magazine, over 87% say they agree with the SVP stance.
Given these numbers, SOFS's Glaettli says his organization is busy building up a coalition of left-leaning parties and taking their cause to social media to persuade voters to reject both proposals. If either is accepted by a majority of voters and cantons, Switzerland will become the first country in Europe to have a mandatory deportation clause included in its constitution. To Glaettli and his allies, that would make Switzerland the black sheep of Europe.