Contradictions to the ballot box

Swiss citizens return to the ballot boxes on 26 November. Two new referenda are concentrated on the federal law on family benefits and on the law relating to cooperation with the states of Eastern Europe. The latter – as explained by the explanatory brochure sent to every Swiss household in recent days – “permits the continuation of support for the transition to democracy and a social market economy” in the former Communist states. SIR has sounded out the views of the jurist from Canton Ticino, ALBERTO LEPORI , former professor of public law at Fribourg, for several years Swiss MP and cantonal minister for justice. Actively involved in the Swiss Catholic Church, he has chaired the national Commission of Justice and Peace for the last four years. The Swiss Confederation is calling citizens to the ballot box once again, after the vote in late September on reforms to the status of foreigners and refugees, whose results aroused some dismay even beyond the frontiers of Switzerland. This time the theme of the referendum is European: what’s your position? “This referendum comes at a delicate time. We have to bear in mind that in a year’s time we’ll have the elections to the federal Parliament and the parties have long been warming up for the electoral campaign. With regard to the vote on cooperation with the countries of Eastern Europe, it should first of all be explained that the current law permits Switzerland to help the nations that once formed part of the Soviet bloc to grow in terms of democracy and a modern market economy, and to invest in education and infrastructures. The figure in question is rather modest: what’s at issue is to commit 200 million francs per year for five years”. Yet the result seems rather uncertain. “Yes, that’s true. I am convinced Switzerland should continue to support these countries; they must risk a course of solidarity parallel to that being conducted in the European Union. But it is equally true that public opinion in my country seems to be of two minds about the matter. Opinion polls seem to give the victory to the ‘yes’ camp. But how can we fail to take account of recent xenophobic attitudes in Switzerland?”. Are you alluding to the result of the referendum in late September? “In that case Switzerland, which has a long tradition of openness to foreigners, and is the seat of the International Committee of the Red Cross and other important international organizations, approved two laws that deteriorate the situation of foreigners and refugees in our country. I think political observers, faced by these results, cannot fail to note the failure of Swiss citizens to respond to the appeals of many humanitarian organizations and associations, all aligned in their opposition to the two laws in question. That also goes for the Churches and religious communities, and their social organizations, which seem to have obtained rather little support”. Is it a question on which it is still worth reflecting today? “I would say so, also in the light of the many irrational fears that seem to be emerging in our people, fomented by some xenophobic political groups, with positions expressed even within the federal Council, in other words, within our government. We may also think of the results registered in other electoral consultations where the recommendations of the bishops were ignored by the majority of voters: I cite the law for research on stem cells, the Sunday opening of shops, and civil partnerships between homosexuals”. To return to the referendum of 26 November, the law on cooperation with the countries of Eastern Europe has received the explicit support of the Swiss bishops. “It seems to me that this is the real significance of the vote and I hope that the Swiss will embrace the position supported by the bishops. What’s at stake is investing in the future Europe, founded on democracy, rule of law, peaceful coexistence, and unity in diversity. It’s also true that a positive result would permit good bilateral relations to be maintained with the EU”. You recently expressed misgivings about the way Swiss politics are developing… “In effect after the elections in 2003, the distribution of the seven seats of the government, in conformity with the unwritten rule of their proportional division between the major parties, has changed, with the result that a second seat is now awarded to the anti-European right and subtracted from the centrist Democratic Party. So, in recent years, to express so-called concordance, we have had the most quarrelsome government of all time. The Federal Council ought not to be a mere photocopy of the electorate; that function is up to Parliament. The government, by contrast, is asked to have a shared programme and a coherent policy, and this may be difficult if account were taken of proportional representation alone. This too is an issue to which we need to devote further reflection and discussion”.