Government Policy and the Nonprofit Sector: Switzerland - VMI

Nollert and Budowski Government Policy and the Nonprofit Sector: Switzerland
The Swiss Parliament itself may also recommend an administrative consultation 35 . In this case it is either the
government department or the parliamentary commission responsible for the issue that is in charge of seeing
the process through to its conclusion.
If accuracy regarding contents, possibility of successful implementation and social acceptance on a rather
unimportant issue need to be verified, a hearing takes place. A government department, office or
administrative commission is the party responsible for opening the consultation procedure. If the consequences
of such an issue are considered minor, fewer people are addressed and the procedural formalities are more
limited. A further peculiarity of the Swiss political system is the so‐called Federation Complaint Right, which was
incorporated into Federal Nature and Homeland Protection Law 36 in 1966, into the Environmental Protection
Law 37 of 1983, and into the Federal Law on Walking and Hiking Trails Act 38 of 1985. The law allows national
environmental associations that are at least ten years old to instigate investigations by the authorities into
projects that have an environmental impact, such as applications for deforestation or for construction outside
zoned areas, for rural land improvements, as well as other governmental tasks.
Despite the weight of direct democratic devices in the Swiss political agenda, it is worth noting that these
devices, particularly the initiative, have little chance of success at popular vote. So far, both Swiss citizens and
cantons have voted against nine out of ten Swiss citizens’ initiatives. In short, since the initiative has existed (as
a device in the constitution since 1891), only 15 out of 162 have been accepted. Referenda by contrast are
much more successful. Of the 161 facultative referenda to date, 88 have been accepted. The poor success rate
of initiatives is often due to settlement between the legislator and the originator or even the result of a counter‐
proposal. In addition, it is much more costly to create a legislation requiring 100,000 signatures than to organize
50,000 signatures rejecting the introduction of new law. Hence, affluent NPOs or even entrepreneurs launch
initiatives most often. In contrast, even small NPOs can realize a successful referendum. Since 1987, the
possibility of a “double yes” vote exists; this means that there can be a vote for both the initiative and the
counter‐proposal. In such cases a tie‐break question is used to decide which of the two texts will go forward.
In the past ten years only the following five “public initiatives” 39 have been accepted:
• Initiative for “genetically modified free crops” 40
Effective on 27/11/2005
• Initiative for “lifelong incarceration of untreatable and extremely dangerous sexual and violent
criminals” 41 Effective on 8/2/2004
• Initiative for “membership of Switzerland in the United Nations (UN)” 42
Effective on 3/3/2002
35 Vernehmlassung
36 Bundesgesetz über den Natur‐ und Heimatschutz
37 Umweltschutzgesetz
38 Bundesgesetz über Fuss‐ und Wanderwege
39 Volksinitiative
40 Initiative für Nahrungsmittel aus gentechnikfreier Landwirtschaft
41 Initiative für die lebenslange Verwahrung für nicht therapierbare, extrem gefährliche Sexual‐ und Gewaltstraftäter
42 Initiative für den Beitritt der Schweiz zur Organisation der Vereinten Nationen (UNO)
16