Categories: Politics

Turk is allowed to stay in Switzerland despite 12 years of social assistance

class=”sc-3778e872-0 cKDKQr”>

In Switzerland for 19 years, 12 of which on welfare: that is no reason for the administrative court of Bern to withdraw the residence permit in the case of a 63-year-old Turk.

A 63-year-old Turk is allowed to stay in Switzerland, although he received a total of CHF 343,000 in social assistance from 2008 to 2020 and is likely to remain dependent on aid in the future. This has been determined by the Administrative Court of Bern.

The residential community had revoked the man’s residence permit in 2019 “because of continued dependence on welfare”. The cantonal security service supported the decision.

The man filed a complaint with the administrative court and was now proved right, according to the judgment published on Monday. The decision is not yet final.

12 years on welfare

According to the court, the man has been living in Switzerland for 19 years and has only worked sporadically during that time. For twelve years he received continuous social assistance. This only changed after the municipality of residence had initiated the procedure for withdrawing the residence permit.

After that, the man took jobs as a newspaper seller and advertiser, and also set up a small shop. He has not received any assistance since January 2021.

At the beginning of 2022, the man took early retirement and has since received a minimum partial AHV pension. He continues to run the Brockenstube.

Advertisement

Additional services no reason

However, the question for the court is whether he will be able to independently provide for his minimum subsistence in the future. “Rather, he is more likely to be permanently dependent on additional services and thus, in turn, on public sector services,” the verdict said.

The residence permit can be withdrawn if someone is permanently and to a considerable extent dependent on social assistance. However, according to standing rulings of the federal courts, supplemental benefits are not covered by the concept of social assistance.

The complaint is therefore well founded, the administrative judge writes. The man must keep the residence permit. It is not known whether the authorities will appeal the verdict to the Federal Supreme Court. (SDA)

Source:Blick

Share
Published by
Livingstone

Recent Posts

Terror suspect Chechen ‘hanged himself’ in Russian custody Egyptian President al-Sisi has been sworn in for a third term

On the same day of the terrorist attack on the Krokus City Hall in Moscow,…

1 year ago

Locals demand tourist tax for Tenerife: “Like a cancer consuming the island”

class="sc-cffd1e67-0 iQNQmc">1/4Residents of Tenerife have had enough of noisy and dirty tourists.It's too loud, the…

1 year ago

Agreement reached: this is how much Tuchel will receive for his departure from Bayern

class="sc-cffd1e67-0 iQNQmc">1/7Packing his things in Munich in the summer: Thomas Tuchel.After just over a year,…

1 year ago

Worst earthquake in 25 years in Taiwan +++ Number of deaths increased Is Russia running out of tanks? Now ‘Chinese coffins’ are used

At least seven people have been killed and 57 injured in severe earthquakes in the…

1 year ago

Now the moon should also have its own time (and its own clocks). These 11 photos and videos show just how intense the Taiwan earthquake was

The American space agency NASA would establish a uniform lunar time on behalf of the…

1 year ago

This is how the Swiss experienced the earthquake in Taiwan: “I saw a crack in the wall”

class="sc-cffd1e67-0 iQNQmc">1/8Bode Obwegeser was surprised by the earthquake while he was sleeping. “It was a…

1 year ago