SVP and centrists reject amendments to the Foreign Nationals Act
Published: Thursday, Aug 22nd 2024, 10:30
Volver a Live Feed
The SVP, the Center Party and the cantons of Glarus and Schaffhausen reject the bill to amend the Foreign Nationals and Integration Act - albeit for different reasons. The majority of other parties and associations have spoken out in favor.
With the revision of the law, the Federal Council wants to amend the regulation on family reunification of temporarily admitted persons in the Foreign Nationals and Integration Act. Accordingly, the current three-year general waiting period for family reunification is to be reduced to two years.
This was in response to a landmark ruling by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), which was also confirmed by the Federal Administrative Court (FAC) in November 2022. The consultation period ended on Thursday.
The SVP firmly rejects the draft, as it wrote in its response. It is unacceptable that foreign judges are increasingly making political rulings that contradict the will of the legislator and the sovereign. After all, their task is to apply laws, not to create them. Furthermore, there is no objective reason why a two-year period would be fairer and a three-year period disproportionate.
No adjustment necessary
It is also clear to the center that neither the ECHR ruling nor the FAC demand a mandatory reduction in the waiting period. On the contrary, the rulings emphasize that an individual assessment is necessary after two years and that this is already the case today with the Department of Justice. For this reason, the Center sees no need for legislative action and requests that the revision be dispensed with.
The Schaffhausen government argues similarly. It also fears, like the canton of Glarus, that this could increase the number of applications. And according to the response from the government in Glarus, this would no longer be manageable with the current number of staff in the cantons.
Preventing the pull effect
Preventing such a pull effect is also a "particular concern" for the FDP. In principle, it supports the amendment "to bring the legal provisions into line with the case law of the ECtHR". After all, it is important for a constitutional state to respect its international obligations.
At the same time, however, the criteria for family reunification must remain strict in order to ensure that there is no increased migration to Switzerland. After all, a comparison with other European countries shows that the planned adjustment is in line with international standards.
Preventing a shortening of the immigration period
For the Swiss Conference of Integration Delegates (KID), it is in the interests of both the persons concerned and society that temporarily admitted persons can also integrate as quickly as possible. It therefore welcomes the changes in principle.
At the same time, she points out that shortening the waiting period to two years also shortens the period available for family reunification. This is five years for spouses and children under the age of twelve and one year for children over the age of twelve. During this time, applicants must prove, among other things, that they are independent of social welfare and will be able to finance the family in the future.
The KID therefore proposes that this period of grace should only run for three years after provisional admission has been ordered. This would maintain the status quo.
Further demands
The Greens see the same danger. The party described the proposed amendment as "a step in the right direction". However, it would like to remove the time limit for family reunification and the "high financial hurdles" without replacement.
The Swiss Catholic Women's Association sounds a similar note. It also welcomes the shortening of the waiting period, but at the same time calls for either the removal of certain conditions for family reunification or the deadlines within which an application for family reunification must be submitted.
Finally, the SP emphasized that the amendment of the national law following the ECHR ruling was "correct and important". At the same time, it is "essential for implementation in accordance with international law" that family reunification must also be examined and approved before the two-year waiting period expires if it proves to be disproportionate.
©Keystone/SDA
Spanish 
English 
German 
French 
Arabic