61340 Vorabseiten_e - Unabhängige Expertenkommission Schweiz

even betrayed in the face of the German threat. It was first and foremost an
assumption that, on the one hand, could be quoted insofar as any action was
desirable; and on the other hand, it could be used as a justification for passivity. 79
As early as the 19 th century, granting asylum was considered a prerogative of
the state to strengthen its sovereignty (and exercised to demonstrate this
prerogative), while the individual refugee had no legitimate claim to asylum.
During the Second World War, soldiers especially benefited from the humanitarian
actions of the Swiss authorities (e.g., soldiers wounded in action who were
repatriated), as well as the civilian population affected by the war (e.g.,
admission of children), while many refugees who were being persecuted by the
Nazis were turned back at the border. At the same time, however, the
widespread awareness of a humanitarian tradition was an additional argument
advanced by those who demanded a more open attitude towards Jewish
refugees. This constituted a good argument in the face of the authorities’ policy
on emigrants and served to «interfere» in their work, causing Rothmund to
voice the following with some criticism:
«The asylum tradition of our country is so well anchored that not only each
Swiss citizen, but every Federal office too, that has to deal with an
individual refugee tends to give him the benefit of the doubt and admits
him refusing admission only if there are special reasons for so doing.» 80
3.3 Players and Responsibility
Who was responsible for the policy on refugees of the time? For a long time,
research and public debate focused on the role of the Federal Department of
Justice and Police (Eidgenössisches Justiz- und Polizeidepartement, EJPD), which
was an important player with regard to policy on refugees, and thus in particular
on Federal Councillor Eduard von Steiger and the head of the Police Division
Heinrich Rothmund. In 1970, however, the historian Edgar Bonjour alleged
that the whole of Switzerland had failed:
128
«The whole generation of that time failed to do its duty and shares the
blame. Because in a direct democracy such as that of Switzerland, the people,
if they had really made an effort, would not have been forced to sit back and
accept a governmental policy of which they did not approve for ten years.
[...] The hidden egoist and potential anti-Semite in each citizen deliberately
ignored the inhumanity of certain aspects of official policy on asylum.» 81