Switzerland: Asylum and immigration (2)
01 January 1991
Switzerland: Asylum and immigration
artdoc April=1995
New law legalises internment
The UN Committee Against Torture has criticised the Swiss
government for putting forward an amendment to the `Foreigners
law' which will legalise the internment of any foreigner who is
not a permanent resident in Switzerland. The law will apply to
asylum-seekers, seasonal workers, and foreigners with a one-year
residence permit. Those opposed to the proposed new law have
formed a National Committee to coordinate a petition to seek a
referendum against the amendment. Under Swiss law, citizens can
challenge new laws introduced by parliament by referendum, as
long as they meet certain conditions, including providing a
petition signed by 50,000 registered Swiss voters. Bases of new
law
The law allows for preventative detention of a foreigner without
a residence permit. The decision to detain is a matter for
administrative authorities and can be based on the suspicion that
a foreigner intends to remain illegally in the country. It allows
for:
* the detention of a foreigner who is to be deported or removed
for up to nine months;
* the judiciary and administrative authorities to confine
foreigners to certain areas of the city or canton if they suspect
they may be `tempted' into criminal activities such as drug
trafficking;
* police to search without a warrant refugee solidarity groups
who they suspect of hiding illegal immigrants and asylum-seekers.
Opposition divided
Despite the reluctance of left-wing parties and human rights
organisations to contest the new law, 75,000 people signed a
petition against it. The law will therefore be submitted to a
general referendum in December. The Socialist party initially
refused to support the National Committee set up to oppose the
law on the grounds that `it is not certain that the referendum
will win and if it doesn't the loss will fuel right-wing
parties'. Religious associations, such as the Protestant
Federation and the Council of Bishops and even some refugee
solidarity groups also refused to support the demand for a
referendum on similar grounds.
The Christian Democrats have responded to the criticism that the
law is a breach of civil liberties by arguing that there is an
`objective difference between a foreigner without a legal permit
to remain and a Swiss' (Courier 9,11,17, 23.3, 12,18.5, 5.7.94,
Tribune de Genève 21.3.94).
Treatment of refugee highlights new law
The case of an asylum-seeker from Chad has highlighted the way
in which the police are enforcing the new law, even before it has
come into effect. On 25 February 1994, police presented the
refugee with a document, signed by a judge, authorising his
detention pending deportation. At that time, the man was in
possession of a visa which authorised his stay in Switzerland.
Nevertheless, on 1 March the police attempted to deport him to
Chad. The aeroplane pilot, however, refused to accept the refugee
on board. The following day, the judge signed another warrant
authorising detention. From prison, the refugee sent a letter to
the judge asking why he was detained and pointing out that there
were no legal grounds for his detention as he had committed no
crime. The judge responded with a letter upholding the detention.
This letter, however, did not inform him of his right to consult
a lawyer. This information was only offered some three weeks
later, the day before the man's proposed removal. Even then, the
judge insisted that the man must instruct a lawyer at his own
expense since the detention was administrative and not penal -
and therefore, no counsel was guaranteed.
On that very day, two police searched the cell and forced the
refugee to undress for a strip search. They then took him to the
airport where they placed him in a cell, handcuffed and chained
him to a chair. They also tied his hands with tape. One of the
policemen tried to force the refugee to swa