Swiss back tighter asylum rules

[Battle of Kursk]

Swiss voters have overwhelmingly backed a controversial move to tighten asylum restrictions amid a spike in the number of refugees in the country.

Almost 80% of voters approved changes made to the asylum law last September, final results of a referendum said.

Under the new rules military desertion is no longer a reason for granting asylum, and people cannot now apply through Swiss foreign embassies.

About 48,000 people are in the process of seeking asylum in Switzerland.

The BBC's Imogen Foulkes, in Geneva, says Switzerland has a long tradition of generosity towards asylum seekers - its proportion of refugees per head of population is twice the European average.

But the number of asylum seekers is rising sharply and is at its highest in a decade.

That, coupled with sharp rises in immigration overall, has led to public concern that too many people are coming to Switzerland, our correspondent says.
'Economic reasons'

Human rights groups and left wing parties gathered enough signatures to force Sunday's referendum, in a bid to get the government measures withdrawn, warning that they could lead to discrimination.

Speaking after the result, the groups described the outcome as "a disaster for asylum seekers and refugees" that left "no winners".

One of the most controversial changes was the removal of military desertion as a valid reason for asylum.

Desertion is the key reason cited by Eritreans -the largest group of applicants last year - whose country imposes unlimited military service on all able-bodied men and women.

The result also removes the provision - unique in Europe - that enabled asylum seekers to claim asylum in Swiss embassies around the world.

Celine Amandruz of Switzerland's largest party, the populist Swiss People's Party (SVP), however welcomed result, telling AFP news agency that that nine out of 10 people who sought refuge in the wealthy country did so "for economic reasons".

"There is clearly a need to change this system," she said.

Switzerland counts one asylum seeker for every 332 inhabitants. The European average is one asylum seeker for every 625 inhabitants.

BBC News - Swiss back tighter asylum rules

 

[Battle of Kursk]

Europe is slowly but surely turning it's back on immigration. I think it's a good move that will increase the chance that the immigrants that are already there will assimilate.
opinions?

 

[Thəorətic Muslim]

Did a paper on Challenges for a common EU Migration policy.

Each European State in the EU considers migration as each State's sovereign issue, meaning no State is willing to allow the EU create a policy on migration. Due to each State viewing migration as a labor-market, social security, and taxation complexity.

The EU started out as the European Economic Community, then gradually changed dynamics into a Political Union.

And what was said about shopping for the best asylum benefits is true.

In conclusion,; since World War 2, visionaries have attempted to unite the long conflicting European peoples. To exploit the wealth, and create hegemony the continent has lost because of a changing global order. While the farsighted thinkers were able to create an integrated continent, with a common market, much still has to be done. While the E.U. has been able to move forward and improve relations between its Member States, the weak E.U. international policy withholds the union from achieving its fullest potential. Pending the realization that a common migration policy has to be negotiated at the supranational level, a policy that can be implemented and enforced; can help the E.U. in not only greater integration but also as an International policy maker. Until then, the E.U. is a pioneer among supranational level organizations.

 

[Silverblaze]

Europe is slowly but surely turning it's back on immigration. I think it's a good move that will increase the chance that the immigrants that are already there will assimilate.
opinions?

In these economic times, it is a better decision. However, academic and business oriented immigrants should not be completely withdrawn. It contributes to the economy.

 

[Tshering22]

Europe is slowly but surely turning it's back on immigration. I think it's a good move that will increase the chance that the immigrants that are already there will assimilate.
opinions?

It was coming. Europeans had excessively liberalized their laws in the name of extreme self-guilt of the colonial past and the skeletons of WW2. It served them 2 purposes: cheaper talented and unskilled labour to cover post-war manpower shortage and at the same time allowed their economies to grow, depicting a more acceptable and open society among European countries.

However, the liberalization was so extreme that Europeans ended up taking in fanatics, fundamentalists and intolerant crazies from dangerous countries in the name of asylum.

Now European nations have turned to the opposite direction and in the future if the radicalized islamist attacks continue, then it will only lead to birth of more stricter entry controls and emergence to BNP-like groups.

 

[flamer84]

Europe is slowly but surely turning it's back on immigration. I think it's a good move that will increase the chance that the immigrants that are already there will assimilate.
opinions?

A very good move by Switzerland,rest of Europe should follow.No more room,the inn is full.

 

[Tshering22]

A very good move by Switzerland,rest of Europe should follow.No more room,the inn is full.

Actually that is a wrong approach. The inn isn't full.. it is full with the wrong kind of people. Rather than deporting radicals and fundamentalist sympathizers, your governments appease them and give them benefits. This is the fundamental flaw in your countries' planning and immigration model.

By restricting immigration for all like a blanket, you send the wrong message and it doesn't stop the radicalization and demographic warfare fought inside your countries. Tell me what do middle eastern countries do when they deem a specific group or organization or anything else threatening them? They simply deport them.

Instead your government is doing the opposite; appeasing them beyond what the troublemakers deserve. This type of an action will only encourage fanning tensions across your countries and the good, law-abiding immigrants also bear the brunt of a backlash despite doing nothing wrong.

So the problem is in the approach.

First your countries must identify the trouble mongers, quarantine them from the blanket "immigrant" population, and then deal with them.

This sort of stern rules will ensure that people are law abiding and at the same time there is a steady inflow of talent from around the world.