1

TWELVE KEY POINTS ABOUT SWISS POLITICS AND DEMOCRACY

For all its economic importance, and despite the strong feelings it often arouses,
Switzerland is surprisingly poorly understood, known and, occasionally, esteemed. This
is true amongst outsiders, notably the British with their general lack of interest in small
countries, and even sometimes of the Swiss themselves. Often the latter a will say that
Swiss politics is too boring to be of interest to anyone else. Others say that Switzerland
is a blessed special case or Sonderfall. In any case much of what little is written about
the country in the English speaking world is often inaccurate, misconceived or unfair.
As a result a whole range of myths about the country and its political system have
developed, notably at election time when some very silly things can be said as was the
case in both 1999 and 2003 when the nature of the Swiss right was often totally
misunderstood.
The notes that follow are a brief attempt to try and correct some of these
misconceptions by pointing out some key features of the Swiss political system. In many
ways Switzerland is a very typical European country with a mixed economy, a plural
society and an active democracy. However, the precise nature of its social economy and
the way it implements the principles of democracy are unusual. On the one hand, as well
as having many highly internationalized firms, it also has a somewhat inward looking local
economy. On the other hand, the Swiss base themselves on a different, but equally valid,
view of democracy from that which prevails in the United Kingdom, America and many
other western states. And the fact that this type of democracy is housed in a very
decentralized federal structure means that Swiss democracy is very complicated as well
as very unusual. Swiss politics are therefore often thought to be ultra-stable but, today,
partly as a result of the pressures of European and global change, they - along with
Swiss democracy - seem to be changing more nowadays than has been the case for
many years past.

1. Swiss Democracy Rests on a Varied and Prosperous Economy Swiss society,

politics and democracy in part owe their stability, and much else, to the fact that postwar Switzerland has been highly successful economically. This has mitigated social
unrest and prevented conflict and extremism. It has also provided resources which have
lubricated the system and kept taxation under control. For Katzenstein, Switzerlands
economic situation forces it into internal cooperation and moderation.
Although the country is poor in natural resources it has, since the early nineteenth
century, made itself into a thriving open market economy. This has been due to traditional
business contacts, high levels of education and training, and a willingness to adapt and
innovate. The country spends more per capita on Information Technology than any other
OECD country. Not having been involved in the last war provided a further base for rapid
economic growth after 1945 which allowed the country to claim, on numerous occasions,

that it was the richest in the world in per capita GDP terms.
Its success was based on highly competitive manufacturing industries and very
developed services. Swiss manufacturing strengths are in chemicals, engineering and
watch making. In services its banking and financial services are legendary, and its
tourism and transport activities are well developed. There is also a small and highly
protected agriculture. Farmers, business and unions are closely involved in the political
process, notably through the consultation process which precedes legislation.
This still remains true even though the years between 1991 and 2004 proved a
difficult time. Growth rates were low and, indeed at times the economy fell into recession.
Many Swiss firms experienced severe difficulties, exposing the limitations of the cosy
systems of cartellized economic governance. The collapse of Swissair was the most
striking example of this. As a result unemployment rose sharply even though, at about 4%,
it always remained well below European norms, as did growth rates. These were some
of the reasons why government finances, both locally and nationally, fell severely into the
red until recently. Today, even with a new global downturn beginning, the country still has
considerable economic strengths and prospects. These continue to help democratic
stability and moderation. However, they are only one of the factors at work.

2. Swiss Democracy Derives from a Divided ,but Largely Harmonious, Society Stability may seem somewhat surprising given the divisions inherent in Swiss society,
divisions brought about by the way Switzerland developed historically. Indeed, many
Swiss are very conscious that their country is somewhat fragile because of its divisions.
The assumed fragility comes from the fact that the country lacks ethnic and religious unity.
65% of Swiss citizens are German speakers, 19% French, 8% Italian and 1% Romansch.
It should not be forgotten that High German is used mainly for writing and formal public
occasions. Schyzerdtsch dialects, impenetrable to most outsiders, are used in every day
life. All three language groups are themselves divided both on religious lines between
Roman Catholic and Calvinist Protestant - and between urban centres and rural mountain
zones. Switzerland also has a clear class structure with a small elite, a very large middle
class, and a small working class.
Many of the latter are part of the large body of foreigners in Switzerland, mainly
guest-workers in industry and the service sector who, except in limited circumstances are
denied most rights of citizenship. Foreigners are not normally allowed either a vote or
representation. Some cantons, however, now allow them to vote in local elections. In fact
new questions of multi-culturalism are being superimposed on traditional divides. And
poverty and illiteracy are not unknown. Neither is violence against non-western asylum
seekers.
But these divisions are less conflictual and destabilizing than is sometimes
assumed. This is, in part, because the divisions do not all coincide as they do in such
countries as Belgium. They cross cut geographically, politically and socially. This
complexity means that internal divisions are both changing and less likely to explode.
However, the French-German language divide - often known as the Rstigraben and
named after the typical potato dish of German speaking Switzerland - seemed to be
getting more intense and threatening in the 1990s. However, in the present decade
linguistic disharmony has faded somewhat. Thus it did not really surface in the elections

of 2003 and 2007 which some think to have been the most national in recent times.
Stability is also due to deeply rooted traditions of good labour relations which go
back to a key 1937 agreement between management and unions, the so called Labour
Peace. This banned both strikes and lock-outs while establishing a tradition of collective
contracts. Hence labour disputes are rare and unionization is both modest and declining,
although strikes do occur. And there is also a well developed welfare system which has,
in turn, helped to knit society together. Financed by individuals, firms, and public
institutions, especially local authorities, it is - as in other countries - under pressure from
a combination of financial problems and an ageing population. And although women had
to wait a long time for the vote they are now very well represented in government and
parliament. All this also helps to shape Swiss politics and democracy.

3. Switzerland is held together by political will and its institutions. Despite the
diversity of its host society, Swiss democracy is very firmly based. This is not just an
economic matter. Even more important is the way the country has developed historically.
On the one hand, people have consistently chosen to stay together rather than go their
separate ways or align themselves with culturally close neighbours. Hence Switzerland
is often described as willensnation or the product of a national will. On the other hand,
Swiss unity and democracy is based on the acceptance, and utilization, of an unusual set
of institutions which have provided both safeguards and space for the varying
communities to develop and cooperate. These include direct democracy, federalism and
neutrality, things seen as major elements of Swiss national identity. Such national
institutions and practices are fiercely prized and esteemed. They are thus seen as highly
successful - in having enabled the Swiss to survive the last war and then prosper - and
morally superior to those of other countries. Konkordanz is produced not by negotiations
amongst the elite but by the working of institutions.
This firmly held belief is an essential part of their political culture, along with
balance, caution, consensus, localism and toleration. Hence a few years ago one Swiss
film maker compared the Swiss to the Jews in their belief that they are a chosen people.
These beliefs have long been present but, over the last few years, they have become
central to a rising populist political movement, largely based on the Swiss Peoples Party
[SVP/UDC], which attracts almost a third of the electorate and has come to play a
dominant political role partly because of its patriotic defence of Swiss identity.

4. Swiss Democracy is very nationally minded As a result of the strength of these

underlying political commitments Swiss political culture is very patriotic and nationally
minded. The fact that Switzerland is neutral and, before 2002, was outside the United
Nations leads many to assume that Switzerland is careless of normal national feelings and
interests. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Though Swiss national feeling is non
aggressive it is nonetheless very real. Being aware of their internal fragility the Swiss are
determined to maintain their national existence and the institutions and practices on which
it is seen to rest. Indeed, it has been said that their foreign policy is actually a domestic
policy, designed to keep external complications from disturbing the internal balance.
The army also plays a major role in both binding the country (or usually its menfolk)

providing it with the assurance of a secure defence against the many threats which the
Swiss believe still face them. So the Swiss have, for some years, had one of the largest
armies in Europe, albeit of a militia kind. However, the role and size of the army is now
changing as is the very strict interpretation of neutrality. Thus the country, as a UN
member, has taken some clear stances and, despite continuing unease on the right, takes
a limited part in the Partnership for Peace and sends armed soldiers abroad in support of
UN humanitarian missions etc.
Nonetheless, both the governments position and public opinion are still very Swiss
and are very firmly defended. Swiss foreign policy tends to be based jointly on the
countrys economic interests and its commitment to cooperation, international law and
peace. In recent years it has become much more assertive in these fields, sometimes to
the discomfort of both Israel and the USA. However, this has sometimes been criticized
as undermining the countrys all important neutral stance.

5. Swiss Democracy is, above all, a Peoples Democracy - Any tendencies to

instability are curbed by the fact that, at the basis of the Swiss political system, is the
individual citizen. Collectively Swiss citizens are regarded as the sovereign in a very real
sense. They take a very active part in governance not just by electing MPs but by
selecting local government leaders, deciding policy matters and controlling finance through
the various mechanisms of direct democracy. This reflects the fact that the country really
emerged from the bottom up in local and cantonal communities. Hence it has always been
actively republican and, thus, suspicious of authority. Very often it is the people, and not
any political parties, who are regarded as the true opposition.
And political authorities recognize the ultimate right of the people to determine
policy. Seeking wide support so as to head off a challenge to legislation is common.
Equally, resignation when ones proposals are defeated is rejected out of hand. To the
Swiss, the duty of politicians is to readjust and conform to the popular will. Because of
such attitudes, very few people are deliberately excluded from the political process. So,
even if turn out at referenda and elections can be low, their results retain tremendous
legitimacy. Participation in the latter fell consistently until very recently. However, even the
2007 elections only recorded a turnout of 49.5%. Some direct democratic votes can record
even lower figures of about 20% and the trend has been downward since 1992, again
averaging little more than 40%. In other words the people do not always use their rights
to the extent we might suppose.
Nonetheless the popular side of Swiss politics still shows up strongly even in the
use of direct democracy. Whereas most Western democracies are essentially indirect and
representative, with electors allowing parliaments (and the governments which emerge
from them) to make decisions on their behalf, the Swiss citizenry share power directly with
its legislators. Citizens do this by taking part in votations or abstimmung. These are not
occasional plebiscites called by governments, but frequent public decisions initiated by
constitutional law or popular action. For instance, all amendments to the constitution have
to be approved by both cantons and people before they can be applied. Hence the country
is often described as a semi-direct democracy. Outside opinion is all too prone to underestimate the extent and importance of this fact.
Such votes take place at all levels from the commune through the cantons up to

the national, or federal level. At the last they can be either obligatory or popularly initiated.
On the one hand, the rules require that constitutional amendments, binding treaties and
some other decisions have to be decided by the populace, with a majority not just of the
popular vote but of the participating cantons being required for approval. On the other
hand, 50,000 signatures can, if collected within 100 days, require that any new ordinary
federal legislation be submitted to a vote. Equally 100,000 signatures will ensure that an
initiative for a change to the federal constitution is voted on. From 2004 the people have
had the possibility of asking Parliament to consider whether there should be new
legislation or a constitutional amendment in sectors which matter to them. However, this
has yet to be utilized.
The range of direct democratic instruments available at local level is even larger
than that at national level, involving direct election of the cantonal governments, approval
of financial commitments and decisions on many and sometimes all - changes in
legislation. At the sub-national level there is a legislative initiative, allowing citizens to
propose new laws. This facility does not exist at the national level. Hence policy changes
can only be introduced by creating a new constitutional power for the Confederation to act.
This explains why so many very detailed constitutional amendments are proposed, making
the national constitution somewhat overloaded.
The emergence, since the late 19th century, of this battery of devices has sharply
marked Swiss politics. Direct democracy has enabled minorities to gain representation in
government by demonstrating their power to block national decisions. Hence it becomes
sensible to bring them into government to prevent such blockages by widening potential
support. It has also allowed people to put new ideas on the political agenda. And, as
already implied, it forces government to ensure that it carries the people with it in its
legislation since defeat at a votation can be extremely humiliating even if it does not
require resignations. Direct democracy is thus fundamental to political thinking and to the
way the system works.

6. Switzerland is a very Federal Democracy - The Swiss do not only act as a single
nation, they also work through very devolved structures. Although federalism is one of
the best known aspects of Swiss politics, it is not always fully understood. It is not just a
matter of cantons, but of communes too. The 2,750 Communes are the bed rock of Swiss
governance. Citizenship of one is a pre-requisite for obtaining Swiss nationality. And they
enjoy very large financial, policy and political powers beside which British parish councils
seem totally impotent. Some of the larger communes are real powers in the land. So they
can enjoy a measure of freedom of action even if they are nominally subject to cantonal
authority.
Nonetheless, the cantons raise and spend more about 40% - of Swiss revenues
than either the communes or the Confederation. They are the main executants of the
latters policies and provide many services of their own, notably in educational, police and
social welfare matters. As a result they have to be political systems in their own right, with
their own constitutions, elected governments, legislatures, judiciary and direct democracy.
Their political balance is usually different from that which exists nationally. They are very
varied in size, in religion and socio-economic structure.
And, even if this is only a symbolic and legalistic point, they are often still regarded

as sovereign states. Thus they must concur in constitutional changes and be represented
in consultative and parliamentary processes. Hence any new tasks of government
automatically accrue to the cantons unless the people decide otherwise. They even have
limited external rights. All this reflects the fact that, as already noted, they predate the
creation of a single nation. It is for this reason that some authorities think that, legally if not
in practice, the country is a Confederal State and not a Federation. Indeed the constitution
still talks of the Confederation in French and Italian and, in German, as the
Eidgenossenschaft or sworn fellowship rather than of the Swiss Federation.
But Swiss federalism is not simply a matter of formal institutions. It shapes the
structure of political parties (which are essentially cantonal in nature), the working of direct
(and representative) democracy and the way people think. Many Swiss say they only
become Swiss when they leave the country. At home they are Baslers, Ticinese,
Nidwaldians or Vaudois. They can also place great stress on the fact that their family has
rights in a particular commune even if they live somewhere else.

7. Swiss Democracy is very much a Limited Democracy - Because of federalism and

direct democracy the powers of the Confederation are strictly limited as the Constitution
makes clear. It can do only those things which the constitution, or the people, allow. All
this is laid down in a revised and simplified constitutional document which was approved
in 1999 and came into effect in 2000. This introduced a new stress on civil rights and
limitations on authority.
The government, in particular, is very small both in the number of ministers and the
size of the civil service at its disposal. There are only seven in the Federal Council and
there is no leadership role, only a rotating ceremonial Presidency. Equally, the
Confederation controls relatively few employees and has to make great use of cantonal
administrations and non-governmental organizations to see that its policies are carried out.
Hence its concern to carry people with it when it legislates. Nonetheless the civil service
which is probably bigger than is sometimes claimed - is an important element in policy
making.
Conventionally the Federal Council is seen as a kind of board of administrators for
the popular will. It is not really a coalition in the sense of a alliance of parties agreed on a
programme. The government is selected by Parliament, as a whole, every four years,
according to a formula which reflects parliamentary strength. However, this also makes
evolving a proper programme virtually impossible, even though most ministers hold
relatively centrist opinions. Nonetheless, ministers have their own responsibilities and are
not mandated by their parties. In fact tradition allows them to remain in office for as long
as they chose, despite the existence of regular elections. Until recently the concept of the
smack of firm government has been anathema to most Swiss no matter how much they
like to call for leadership. After the elections of 2003 there was a move in this direction, but
a tendency to put party interests above the collegiate consensus, helped to bring this to
an end in December 2007. Nonetheless, the government remains under pressure.
The state is also very much subject to the rule of law. There are courts at both
cantonal and national levels with the Federal Tribunal at the pinnacle of the judicial system.
It is divided into a general court and sections for administrative, criminal and insurance
affairs. This can pronounce on the constitutionality of cantonal acts but not on the validity

of national legislation. This is partly because this comes from Parliament, and thus
represents the popular will. It is also partly because many state acts can be challenged by
referendum. In other words, there is no real judicial review in the American sense.
However, the Federal Tribunal has developed an active human rights jurisprudence which
has allowed it some influence of this kind. In any case, the legal dimension of Swiss politics
makes it difficult for any public authority to exceed its authority, even if it wanted to do so.

8. Switzerland is only partially a traditional Representative Democracy - The

Confederation consists not just of a Federal Council and Courts but includes a bi-cameral
Parliament as well. Both houses are equally responsible for the passage of legislation. In
theory the lower house, the National Council, represents the people at large, although the
cantons are used as constituencies. The Upper House, or Council of States, represents
the cantons on a two per full unit basis as in the USA. But, though its members are elected
and paid in different ways, they nowadays represent parties as much as cantons. However,
the Council of States is still regarded as a revising chamber to control the National Council.
The Parliament is a part time body which meets only for specified periods of the
year. Hence it is often described, not wholly accurately, as a militia parliament. It works
through committees and party groups. Being recognized as a formal group gives a party,
or a grouping of parties, an established role in the parliamentary process. The Parliament
has a number of powers in terms of diplomacy, election of the government and legislation.
Its members also play an active part in policy consultation and recent elections have
increased its visibility and salience. However, its influence is constrained by the existence
of direct democracy and it is often regarded as a weak parliament. Nonetheless, it plays
a crucial role in Swiss politics and democracy.

9. Swiss Democracy is highly Proportional - Seats in all parliaments, local and national,
and even in the Federal Government, are shared out on a generously proportional basis
so that virtually all shades of opinion are represented. Switzerland has a proliferation of
political parties at all levels, reflecting the variety of social, regional and religious view in
the country. An advanced and open list system of Proportional Representation is used.
This allows electors to mix and weight the various lists. As a result it is relatively easy for
new forces to enter parliament though more difficult for there to be large shifts in opinion
and majority as is the case in Britain. The only exception to this is the Council of States,
most of whose members are chosen by a French style two-ballot system.
The bulk of parties are to the right of centre and the left tends to be in something
of a minority even if the Social Democratic party is often one of the biggest in the National
Council. Nonetheless it is proportionately represented in the Federal Council according
to what is known as the magic formula which, between 1959 and 2003, meant two
representatives each for the Christian Democrats, the Radicals and the Social Democrats
together with one representative of the SVP. At the governmental level an effort is also
made to represent the various language communities, often beyond what is mathematically
necessary. So the system seeks to recreate inherent Swiss pluralism.

10. Switzerland is a very Consensual Democracy - Generally speaking Swiss

democracy seeks to avoid conflict. This is not just true in industrial relations but in politics
as well. Swiss democracy embodies a whole series of checks and balances together with
mechanisms for ensuring that as few people as may be are excluded. The aim is to involve
as many people as possible and develop solutions which carry the widest possible support.
The constitution provides many of the devices for doing this. Thus Federal Councillors are
elected by all MPs and not just by their own side, so that those elected tend to have the
widest and least sectarian support. Such devices help to ensure that most minorities are
heard.
However, traditional processes of consultation on legislation seek to ensure that all
authorities, lobbies, political groupings and specialists take part in policy making. In fact
there are a whole series of policy making networks. Some have said that these give
pressure groups and the civil service too much power. But the aim is to gain general
approval and thus avoid a referendum challenge. This does not always happen because
the Swiss and their political parties have strong opinions and do not hesitate to make them
known. Nonetheless, there is far more consensus and konkordanz and many fewer abrupt
shifts of policy than in majoritarian polities. This is something rather different from what has
been called consociational democracy.

11. Switzerland is a real and vibrant polity, not just a tepid affair, marked by some
unusual devices. Because Switzerland has both such unusual institutions and such a
complicated landscape of cantons and communes, outsiders often regard it as less a real
political system than a disparate (and antiseptic) collection of political instruments. Hence
it is assumed that there is fundamental agreement on both the nature of the system and
its policies. Consequently there is supposed to be no meaningful conflicts or politics so that
parties do not really matter.
This is untrue. Switzerland is a highly plural society and political opinions differ
greatly and are fiercely pursued and expressed. The country is anything but of one mind,
but is increasingly divided and at odds politically. The country also has much informal
politics. In all this Switzerland is no different from most other European polities and
deserves to be considered and understood as a vibrant, conflictual democracy, even if its
institutions and processes are more complex than those in comparable states.

12. Switzerland is not static but is changing. It is often assumed that, because of things
like, on the one hand neutrality, direct democracy and federalism and, on the other, the
highly proportional nature of elections, that there is very little political change in
Switzerland. This too is wrong. There may not be the kind of seismic alterations found in
other countries but things do change in Swiss politics. And they have rarely been more
changeable than over the last 20 years.
Why has this been so ? To begin with the international position which had shaped
Swiss stability changed after 1989. The ending of the Cold War and the development of
European integration called Switzerlands armed neutrality into question, especially with
other countries now playing the Swiss role of providing good offices. In other words the end
of the Cold war presented Switzerland with divisive issues about its identity. Hence there

were challenges both to the very idea of having an army and to the roles, structures and
weaponry envisaged for it. At the same time the Swiss felt it necessary to join the United
Nations and to draw closer to the European Union. However, moves to change underlying
foreign policies were highly controversial and divided the country into an inward and an
outward regarding half. Relations with the EU were the most divisive issue of all and
dominated Swiss politics after 1991. And all this happened at a time when the economy
was going into recession, unemployment was rising to unheard of levels and there was a
surge in migration and asylum seeking.
It was because of these changes Swiss political alignments changed so dramatically
after 1995. On the one hand there has been a notable increase in support for Green
formations. More importantly, on the other, in three successive elections the SVP won ever
more votes and seats so that it has become by far the largest party in Parliament. And it
won many more seats in cantonal legislatures while its social movement ally Action for
a Independent and Neutral Switzerland was very active. In 2003 it forced Parliament to
elect its leader, Christoph Blocher, to the government.
At the same time the party set the political agenda and changed the tone of Swiss
politics. By concentrating on a few emotive issues, using highly coloured and provocative
advertising and denouncing the rest of the political class which it accused of betraying
the nation it made Swiss politics much more abrasive and confrontational. Its superior
organization and resources also challenged the other parties as well as hardening policies
in key areas like immigration and Europe. Pressure groups were also increasingly eclipsed
by parties. All this was very reminiscent of the populism visible in other west European
countries in recent years with its ethno-nationalism, welfare chauvinism, charismatic
leadership and anti-elitism. It has led Vatter to suggest that Swiss democracy has moved
from being an extreme case of consensus government to something closer to the
European mainstream.
And the deploying of such tactics inside government made it very hard to maintain
collegiality and consensus. In fact politics have become increasingly polarized and also
mediatized. Hence, despite the partys gains in 2007, parliament refused to re-elect
Blocher and chose a more moderate representative of his party in his place. This caused
the party first to declare itself in opposition and then to launch a ferocious attack on the
new Minister and her allies, forcing them out of the SVP and into new formations. Public
opinion did not react well to all this and refused to back the partys extremist direct
democratic proposals. Nonetheless, the traditional consensual Swiss democracy and the
policies it has pursued have come under great pressure, so that Swiss politics are now
very bitter, fluid and unpredictable.

10

Further Reading:
Church, C.H

The Politics and Government of Switzerland (Palgrave, 2003)

Church C.H (ed) Switzerland and the European Union (Routledge, 2007)
Fossedal, G

Direct Democracy in Switzerland (Transaction Publishers, 2002)

Gabriel JM & Fischer T Swiss Foreign Policy 1945-2002 (Palgrave, 2003)

Goetschel L et al Swiss Foreign Policy: Foundations & Possibilities (Routledge, 2005)
Gsthl, S,

Reluctant Europeans: Norway, Sweden and Switzerland in the

Process of Integration, ( Lynne Rienner, 2002).

Kobach, K

The Referendum (Dartmouth, 1996)

Kloti U et al (eds) Handbook of Swiss Politics (NZZ, 2007)

Kriesi, HP

Direct Democratic Choice (Lexington Books, 2005)

Kriesi HP & Trechsel A The Politics of Switzerland (Cambridge UP, 2009)

Lane. JE (ed) The Swiss Labyrinth (Frank Cass, 2001)
Linder, W

Swiss Democracy (Macmillan, 1996)

New, M

Switzerland Unwrapped (Tauris, 1997)

Steinberg, J

W hy Switzerland ? (Cambridge UP, 1996)

Steiner, J

European Democracies (Longman, 2000)

Useful Websites:
http://www.admin.ch
http://www.kent.ac.uk/politics/cfs/csp/index.html
http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/politics/index.html?siteSect=1500
http://www.swissnetwork.com/
http://www.swissworld.org/en/politics/?gclid=CPe2qM66pJUCFRU7EAodeTv1jQ

Clive H Church and Paolo Dardanelli,

Centre for Swiss Politics,
Rutherford College, University of Kent
Canterbury CT2 7NX
August 2008