SWISS VOTERS STUN GOVERNMENT BY APPROVING "MINARET

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 BERN 000513

C O R R E C T E D C O P Y (REMOVE SENSITIVE CAPTION)

SIPDIS

EUR/CE (Y.SAINT-ANDRE) AND EUR/PGI (I.WEINSTEIN)

E.O. 12958: DECL: 11/30/2019
TAGS: PHUM PGOV KDEM SZ
SUBJECT: SWISS VOTERS STUN GOVERNMENT BY APPROVING "MINARET
BAN"

REF: A. BERN 507

B. 30NOV09 E-MAIL TO EUR-PRESS

BERN 00000513 001.2 OF 003


Classified By: Ambassador Donald S. Beyer; reasons 1.4(b) and (d).

--------------
Summary
--------------


1. (SBU) In a November 29 nationwide vote, Swiss voters
stunned the Swiss government by approving an initiative by
rightwing politicians to ban the construction of new minarets
in Switzerland (reftel). Subsequent analysis by Swiss
commentators suggests that polling data prior to the vote was
skewed by the unwillingness of many persons to admit that
they planned to vote in favor of the ban. Some commentators
attribute the outcome in part to public fears of creeping
Islamization, for which the vote might have been seen as a
proxy. With no other options legally available, and in the
face of a clear outcome in the vote, the Swiss government
(Federal Council) announced that it will respect the decision
of Swiss voters. It confirmed that the construction of new
minarets in Switzerland is no longer permitted. The ban does
not apply to the construction of mosques or to the already
existing four minarets in Switzerland.


2. (C) Speculation in Switzerland now turns to what could
happen if the ban is challenged in court by an individual or
group. In its recommendation to Swiss voters prior to the
vote, the Federal Council argued that such a ban would
"...violate religious freedom." It is unclear what would
happen if such a challenge were to reach the Swiss Supreme
Court, or the European Court of Human Rights. In the wake of
the surprise passage of the ban, the Swiss government is
bracing for the inevitable fallout and moving to counter the
negative impact on Switzerland's international image and
relations as much as possible. In doing so, the Federal
Council has a very narrow margin for maneuver. For the Swiss
people, the right to challenge and to contradict their
elected officials in direct votes on policy issues is a
sacrosanct principle of Switzerland's centuries old
democracy. It seems inevitable that the ban eventually will
face a legal challenge. End Summary.

--------------
PUNDITS AND POLLSTERS SURPRISED
--------------


3. (SBU) In a November 29 nationwide vote, Swiss voters
stunned the Swiss government by approving an initiative by
rightwing politicians to ban the construction of new minarets
in Switzerland (reftel). The final outcome was expected to
be close, but up until the day of the vote, most political
observers expected the initiative would be rejected.
Available polling data supported that assessment. Such
expectations were upturned not only by the passage of the
initiative, but by the strong support it received, with
minaret opponents garnering 57.5 percent of the vote,
including a majority of Swiss voters in 22 of Switzerland's
26 cantons. At 53.4 percent, voter turnout was relatively
high for such nationwide initiatives/referendum. Two other
topics were on the ballot November 29 -- one proposing to ban
weapons exports from Switzerland (which did not pass),and
one proposing to use some aircraft fuel revenues to fund the
Swiss air traffic control system (which passed).


4. (SBU) Subsequent analysis by Swiss commentators suggests
that polling data prior to the vote was skewed by an
unwillingness of many persons questioned to admit that they
planned to vote in favor of the ban. Another reason for the
unexpected outcome was strong mobilization by the supporters
of the initiative. Three of the four cantons whose
majorities rejected the initiative (Geneva, Neuchatel, Vaud)
are in Western Switzerland and have Muslim populations
primarily constituted of immigrants from North Africa and the
Middle East. Persons of Muslim faith living in Eastern
Switzerland overwhelmingly immigrated from the Balkans
(Kosovo) and Turkey. The fourth canton to reject the ban,
Basel-City, is urban in nature, reflecting another split in
the vote in which voters in rural areas of Switzerland voted
more heavily in favor of the ban than voters in the cities.

--------------
GOVERNMENT REACTION
--------------


5. (SBU) With no other options legally available, and in the
face of a clear outcome in the vote, the Swiss government
(Federal Council) announced on November 29 that it would

BERN 00000513 002.2 OF 003


respect the decision of the Swiss voters regarding the ban.
It confirmed that the construction of new minarets in
Switzerland is no longer permitted. The Federal Council
further clarified that the ban does not apply to the
construction of mosques or to the already existing four
minarets in Switzerland. In a press statement, the Federal
council reiterated that the Federal Council and a clear
majority of the Swiss Parliament had come out against the
initiative. It further stated that the ban "...is not a
rejection of the Muslim community, religion or culture. Of
that the Federal Council gives its assurance."


6. (SBU) Justice Minister Widmer-Schlumpf assessed that the
outcome of the vote "...reflects fears among the population
of Islamic fundamentalist tendencies, which reject our
national traditions and which could disregard our legal
order." She went on to state that "these concerns have to be
taken seriously," but dismissed the minaret ban as an
appropriate way to counter extremism.

--------------
PUBLIC REACTION
--------------


7. (SBU) Swiss supporters of the initiative were elated and
quite surprised by the result. Based on pre-election polling
data, the referendum's organizers had so expected defeat that
they had not even bothered to plan a victory party. However,
Swiss Islamic organizations such as the Federation of Islamic
Associations and the Coordination of Swiss Islamic
Organizations expressed strong disappointment, especially
over the degree of voter support for the measure, especially
in Ticino and the German-speaking cantons. Islamic
organizations agreed that proponents of the initiative were
successful in sowing fears among the Swiss public that have
nothing to do with the type of Islam practiced in
Switzerland. They added that the referendum would
fundamentally damage the image of Switzerland in the Muslim
world. This view was echoed by the Swiss Employers'
Federation which expressed fears that the referendum would
have negative consequences for Swiss business and that "it
would endanger decade-long business relationships with
Islamic countries." Business Federation Economie-Suisse
President Gerold Bueher called for the government to be
pro-active in explaining the vote and fostering exchanges of
views, to minimize the potential damage. Amnesty
international called the vote a violation of religious
freedom that is incompatible with the human rights
conventions which Switzerland has signed.

--------------
LEGAL IMPLICATIONS UNCLEAR
--------------


8. (SBU) Speculation in Switzerland now turns to what could
happen if the ban -- which is enacted as an amendment to the
Swiss constitution -- is challenged in court by an individual
or group. In its recommendation to Swiss voters prior to the
vote, the Federal Council argued that such a ban would
"...violate important treaty-based international human rights
guarantees, and would contradict central basic rights in (the
Swiss) constitution. It would violate religious freedom."
The Swiss Green Party already has announced it is
contemplating a legal challenge. Justice Minister
Widmer-Schlumpf has told the press that it is unclear what
would happen if such a challenge were to reach the Swiss
Supreme Court, or the European Court of Human Rights in
Strasbourg. She reiterated that the ban is not consistent
with Switzerland's international human rights commitments.
However, she stopped short of saying how the Swiss government
might react, were the European Court of Human Rights to
strike down the ban, commenting only that the government
would have to make a decision at that point, in light of the
facts relevant to a concrete case.

--------------
COMMENT
--------------


9. (C) In the wake of the surprise passage of the ban, the
Swiss government is bracing for the inevitable fallout and
moving to counter the negative impact on Switzerland's
international image and relations as much as possible. In
doing so, the Federal Council has a very narrow margin for
maneuver. The broad accessibility of referendums and popular
initiatives in the Swiss political system is deeply anchored
in Switzerland's constitutional and political traditions.
For the Swiss people, the right to challenge and contradict
their elected officials in direct votes on policy issues is

BERN 00000513 003.2 OF 003


sacrosanct -- perhaps even the main reason that the majority
of Swiss reject the prospect of EU membership. The Federal
Council has, by Swiss standards, been extraordinarily vocal
and critical with regard to the initiative. However, it has
no choice but to accept the result of the vote, and to manage
the political and legal issues going forward.


10. (C) It seems inevitable that the ban eventually will face
a legal challenge, either from a group or individual. Many
Swiss, particularly urbanites and political elites, are
deeply upset by the outcome, and still digesting its
importance. The supporters of the initiative are triumphal,
and already speaking publicly about future possible
initiatives to ban the wearing of headscarves in the
workplace, or to prevent students from being permitted to opt
out of co-ed school swimming lessons on religious grounds.
Further afield, but drawing on the same fears related to a
rapid increase of immigration to Switzerland in recent years,
some rightwing politicians see a new opportunity to re-open
Switzerland's free movement of persons agreement with the EU.
(Note: The expansion -- to Romania and Bulgaria -- and
indefinite continuation of that agreement with the EU was
confirmed by nearly 60 percent of Swiss voters in a
referendum in February 2009. End Note)


11. (C) The Swiss government has made a decision in principle
in favor of resettling in Switzerland some detainees who are
to be released from Guantanamo Bay. Swiss officials have
reviewed in detail and very positively the cases of three
such individuals. In late October, the GoS informed post
that it was delaying moving forward with a final decision and
announcement in the cases of the three individuals until
after the vote on the anti-minaret initiative. Swiss
officials feared that an announcement of a decision to
resettle these individuals prior to the nationwide vote on
the minaret ban would play into the hands of the ban's
supporters. Post does not yet know how the unexpected
outcome of the vote on the minaret ban will affect GoS
thinking in the matter. We are following up with senior
Swiss contacts to urge them to move forward soon with a
positive decision and announcement on resettlements.


12. (C) The minaret ban is an emotionally-charged issue in
Switzerland. In responding to press or other public queries,
we believe it important for the USG to recognize that the
Swiss government and majority of the Swiss Parliament have
taken clear positions in favor of religious freedom. While
emphasizing our own abiding commitment to supporting
religious freedom, it would be counter-productive for the USG
-- or any other national government -- to insert itself into
the middle of what is still a very raw public debate. In
anticipation of queries, post has forwarded to EUR proposed
draft press guidance (ref B),and appreciates Department's
timely assistance in providing guidance.
BEYER