EU agreement: Swiss associations fear a loss of power
It will be difficult for associations and NGOs to get involved in Brussels. A constitutional expert says Switzerland must compensate for its waning influence with new rights for citizens.
The Maloja Pass serpentines are far from Brussels and Strasbourg, but which trucks are actually allowed are also decided within the EU.
Martin Rügner / Westend 61 / Getty
The new agreement with the European Union planned by the Federal Council will destroy our direct democracy. This is the mantra of the UDC. Repeated countless times, the warning may no longer make headlines. But with a different sender, the same message suddenly seems completely new.
The new sender is political activist Daniel Graf, former secretary of the Zurich Greens party and spokesperson for Amnesty International. In interview given this week to CH Media newspapers Graf criticized that the planned dynamic adoption of European law would disadvantage small associations and NGOs. They couldn't afford to have a lobby in Brussels. Only large organizations would be able to lobby to defend their interests.
It is a warning that shakes the image of Switzerland. In this country, people are proud of the fact that even the smallest association can overturn a law with the help of the people.
Graf did not immediately speak about the destruction of democracy, but he was also very clear: “Direct democracy would change significantly. » These are remarkable sounds coming from left of center.
He is not alone in his criticism. Switzerland is not clear on the “institutional scope” of the European agreement, constitutional law professor Andreas Glaser warned a few months ago. He therefore welcomes the new debate: “It is very gratifying that the criticism of Bilateral III no longer comes only from clearly declared opponents, but reaches wider circles,” says Glaser. “If in the future music plays in Brussels, lobbyists will also have to be there. But only large companies or environmental associations will be able to afford it.”
This problem also arises for associations from EU member states, but for Swiss associations it will be even worse with a new European agreement, because they do not even have contact persons in the European Parliament: "The eco -Dutch organizations can contact their agricultural representatives, German associations contact their automobile representatives in Strasbourg and Brussels. In most cases, no one listens to the Swiss representatives.”
Switzerland in a sidecar
Some organizations are already experiencing this. For example, the Initiative Alpine association. He wants climate-neutral freight transport in Switzerland and has to fight from time to time against legal changes passed in the EU and then adopted by Switzerland.
“As a relatively small organization, it is very difficult on the Brussels scene,” says Fabio Gassmann, the association's political director. “Especially as a Swiss association or NGO, you only drive a sidecar at most.”
The Alpine Initiative therefore considerably reduced its involvement in Brussels a few years ago. Instead, the association has networked with European NGOs, which pursue similar goals, and with the International Commission for the Protection of the Alps, which operates across the EU. “You need allies like that. And if you stay in touch with them, they might be able to discuss a Swiss problem with a politician or civil servant.”
Another example is the Pro Tell association. The organization took part in the referendum against the EU arms directive in 2018 – and was ultimately defeated at the polls. Experiences with the “Brussels device” have been deeply disturbing, says managing director Alessandro Orlando. “As a small association, you are simply at the mercy of the very large dynamics of the EU. »
The weapons directive was actually a French response to the Bataclan attack, and then the solution was imposed on everyone, Orlando says. “If you, as a Swiss association, want to emphasize Swiss particularities to European parliamentarians at a time like this, you will only be laughed at.”
Retreat for the disabled.
Such reports of experience make associations nervous, especially in sectors that would be specifically affected by Bilateral III, such as health, education or agriculture. But the debate catches many people off guard. They have been awakened, but the media statement is not yet ready – just before the summer holidays.
“All associations should now think about the partners with whom they could work at European level. » This is what Green States advisor Maya Graf says. She is co-president of Inclusion Handicap, the umbrella organization of associations of people with disabilities.
The association had argued before the Federal Court that the FV-Dosto long-distance train must be barrier-free. But then Parliament approved the new rail law last fall: the European Union Rail Agency (ERA) is now responsible for approving trains like the Dosto. And the EU is not required to comply with Swiss court decisions.
In the future, there will probably be many more such cases in which associations like Inclusion Handicap will have to ask themselves whether they want to lobby more intelligently at the European level or even obtain a court decision there. Maya Graf says that lobbying in the EU is also possible for small people and is already important today. “This requires more and more collaboration for common efforts and good strategic thinking. »
However, some associations also highlight the other side of the coin. Some issues that are not resolved in Switzerland could experience an easier political situation in the future. In the spring, the European Parliament passed new laws to hold companies accountable for human rights violations in global supply chains.
Countless Swiss companies operating in the EU are also affected. This means that requirements similar to those of the corporate responsibility initiative, which Swiss voters rejected in 2020, are now being implemented.
Unfair electoral battles?
Constitutionalist Andreas Glaser points out that there are other points in Bilaterals III which would greatly affect associations and NGOs. “If a small association takes part in a referendum against the adoption of a European law, it will be at a serious disadvantage in the election campaign from the start,” explains Glaser. “The Federal Council will always threaten to take retaliatory measures in the event of rejection of European law.” This will change the way Parliament and the people form their will, to the detriment of small interest groups.
“The federal authorities must now recognize that there will be a loss of democratic politics in Switzerland and present solutions to compensate for this loss,” says Glaser. To compensate, he could imagine new instruments of democratic politics such as a legislative initiative, a financial referendum or a popular movement.
The Greens are now also using such instruments. Nearly twenty years ago, the party demanded new popular rights, such as a European movement or a European referendum, to compensate for possible EU membership.
Faced with the fears of small associations, these demands are now receiving new impetus. National councilor and vice-president of the Swiss Greens, Sibel Arslan, likes the idea of supporting democratic measures. She declares: “The debate is an opportunity to develop new instruments of democratic participation. »
An article from “NZZ am Sonntag»
English 
French