Things are not looking good for Switzerland’s contract package with the EU. Thailand’s former Prime Minister Thaksin has been released from prison

The reactions were mainly positive. Swiss parties, major associations and the Conference of Cantonal Governments express their approval of the mandate for negotiations with the EU. Still, it would be a surprise if the package were ever implemented.

Improvements can be seen compared to the framework agreement that the Federal Council abandoned in the spring of 2021. The so-called super guillotine, which jeopardized all bilateral agreements with the European Union, has disappeared. And Switzerland appears to have succeeded in restricting the free movement of people into the labor market. The EU was interested in expansion.

However, there has been only marginal change in dispute resolution. If the Joint Committee does not reach an agreement, either Party may request that an arbitral tribunal be convened. If opinions within this body differ on how EU law should be interpreted, the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg will decide.

For the SVP this means: Switzerland pays for privileged access to the EU market at a loss of state sovereignty that is unacceptable. The People’s Party believes that the contract package should therefore be rejected – regardless of the content of the individual agreements.

This will be the most controversial question when voting on the package: will Switzerland lose too much independence, yes or no? This point cannot be avoided. Proponents should try to demonstrate why the new agreements do not endanger the country’s self-determination. They must explain why the accusation that Switzerland is subjecting to the EU is false.

But it remains remarkably quiet. The proponents of the treaty package like to say that Switzerland is dependent on orderly relations with the EU. They don’t elaborate much on the sovereignty issue.

This also applies to the Federal Council. He already accepted this type of dispute resolution in 2019, when he demanded improvements from the EU on three points, but did not criticize the intended role of the European Court of Justice. Why does the state government believe that the agreements with the EU do not undermine the sovereignty of Switzerland and its institutions? Has any member of the government tried to explain this to the people in simple terms? One cannot remember such an interview.

Ball dancing around the mandatory referendum

If the contract package is to pass the test at the ballot box, the success of all parties, with the exception of the SVP, is necessary. What about the reinforced center? In 2020, party chairman Gerhard Pfister described the role of the European Court of Justice in the framework agreement as ‘toxic’. Does he still see it that way? Or has he changed his mind? Out of respect for party figures fighting for the contracts, Pfister is currently hesitant to take a position.

The defensive attitude is also reflected in the fact that the Federal Council and parliamentary committees avoid the question: should the contract package be subject to a mandatory referendum? Should the cantonal majority also be accepted? Anyone who argues strictly legally can answer the question in the negative. From a political perspective, however, it is clear that an international treaty of this magnitude requires a double yes – even if that increases the threshold.

The left now says expense rules need to be changed to protect wages. That could be important for the unions. But what is crucial is something else: politicians who do not avoid the sovereignty debate, but instead raise the core of the treaties with the EU. If this does not happen, the agreement with Brussels will remain a dead letter. Unlike in 2021, the people will pull the plug and not the Federal Council. The result would of course be the same. (aargauerzeitung.ch)