Switzerland faces a historic decision: sovereignty or submission?

18.12.2024, by Bianka Stettler

Relations between Switzerland and the EU are at a crucial turning point. On 20 December 2024, the Federal Council plans to sign the negotiated framework agreement (Bilaterals III) with the EU, a step that could seriously jeopardise the country's independence. This agreement is intended to specify the existing bilateral agreements between Switzerland and the EU - particularly in the areas of market access and economic cooperation - but is already causing fierce political debate, as it provides for high cohesion payments to the EU, among other things, and could jeopardise direct democracy and Switzerland's sovereignty.

The agreement, referred to as a "package solution", turns out to be a complex, difficult-to-understand 1000-page document that could amount to institutional subordination. In order to make the treaty palatable to the country, the Federal Council is planning to divide it into individual packages, which will then be approved by parliament and the people. However, this tactic does not change the fact that the entire treaty should be rejected.

Economic advantages or a strategic mistake?

Those in favour of the framework agreement argue with economic advantages. However, these supposed advantages are disproportionate to the loss of sovereignty. Switzerland has proven that it can be economically successful even without institutional ties to the EU. So why take the risk of submitting to an organisation that is itself struggling with internal challenges?

The cohesion payments that would be due to the EU as part of the agreement raise questions. There is a growing suspicion that the interests of the EU are at the forefront here. According to research, Switzerland would pay around CHF 350 million a year to the EU in future. The exact amount is still open and could change during the negotiations.

Foreign dishes

The discussion on the dispute settlement mechanism and Switzerland's subordination to the CJEU is central to the ongoing negotiations on the Bilaterals III, which are aimed at a new institutional agreement.
Back in 2013, the Federal Council accepted the model proposed by the EU, which envisages Switzerland being subject to the ECJ via an arbitration mechanism. An alternative proposal was ignored, which would have provided for a link to the EFTA Surveillance Authority and the EFTA Court. This alternative would have given Switzerland a greater say without having to adopt the entire internal market acquis. The decision in favour of the ECJ mechanism - originally with a view to a possible rapprochement with the EU - thus led to a political "point of no return", although EU accession was neither publicly supported nor politically realistic at the time.
The dispute settlement mechanism is therefore not only a technical issue, but also a highly charged political one that will characterise the basic features of bilateral relations for decades to come.

Questionable timing

The decision is made on 20 December of all days, just before Christmas, the last day of the winter session. Many see this as a calculated move to take the public and the opposition by surprise.

The people have the last word

The discussion about the framework agreement with the EU raises fundamental questions about Switzerland's independence, democracy and identity. Critics fear an institutional link to the EU and a threat to hard-won sovereignty. It is up to the government to consistently defend the country's interests and counteract such a development. However, if the government fails, the people still have the opportunity to have the last word by means of a referendum. It is to be hoped that the two SVP Federal Councillors will recognise the urgency of a referendum. After all, such a serious encroachment on Switzerland's independence must not take place without the consent of the people.
As friends of the constitution, we are clearly opposed to this agreement.