What are good solutions for people with legally rejected asylum applications in emergency aid? On November 11, five experts from politics, authorities and civil society discussed this question at the invitation of terre des hommes schweiz in Basel. The report on the event with video live streaming.
People often flee from war, violence and poverty. If their asylum application is rejected and they have a legally valid removal order, they must leave Switzerland by law. However, many do not and some cannot because they come from countries with “difficult enforcement procedures” such as Eritrea, China or Tibet and Algeria.
“Some are ‘parked’ for years and remain precariously dependent on the state,” said Sylvia Valentin from terre des hommes schweiz at the start of the panel event entitled “Rejected asylum seekers in emergency aid: what next?”. “Emergency aid prevents integration,” said the person responsible for migration issues at the development organization.
The event on the emergency aid regime
At the invitation of terre des hommes schweiz, five personalities from politics, authorities and civil society discussed possible good solutions for asylum seekers with a negative decision in emergency aid on November 11, 2020 in the salon of the Markthalle Basel: Dieter von Blarer, Jana Häberlein, Claudio Martelli, Samira Marti and Andreas Räss. A report on the situation of emergency aid recipients (PDF) in Switzerland with a focus on the situation in the cantons of Basel-Stadt and Basel-Landschaft served as the basis. It was written by social scientist Jana Häberlein for terre des hommes schweiz.
Since 2008, rejected asylum seekers have only received emergency aid and no longer emergency asylum social assistance. According to the Federal Constitution, the minimum resources that are “essential for a dignified existence” are to be made available, i.e. at a significantly lower rate than social welfare and social asylum assistance. Food, clothing, hygiene articles, basic medical care and shelter are considered essential.
According to the State Secretariat for Migration (SEM), 6,784 people with a negative asylum decision received emergency assistance in Switzerland in 2019. In the fourth quarter of 2019, 2272 people were long-term emergency assistance recipients (LAB), which is the term used after a reference year.
The report from terre des hommes schweiz
and lecturer, study author
“It is almost impossible to live in dignity with emergency aid,” said study author Jana Häberlein at the event. The system was designed as a “short-term measure” – and for “thousands of people, it means remaining in inhumane conditions for years”.
The 36-page report sheds light on the emergency aid system in BS and BL, taking into account the situation in Switzerland as a whole, based on the topics of shelter or accommodation, education and work. The author also spoke to the people affected and to professionals who work in asylum shelters, for example.
There is no uniform standard for the accommodation of emergency aid recipients in Switzerland. They live in collective accommodation and apartments, with host families or in emergency accommodation. “Better accommodation conditions are needed where there are no national minimum standards,” says Jana Häberlein. Her recommendation is that there should be no accommodation in emergency sleeping facilities in Basel-Stadt and that accommodation in asylum apartments, especially for children and their families, should be expanded in Baselland.
Pursuing gainful employment is generally prohibited under the Swiss Foreign Nationals Act. “Long-term emergency aid recipients must be granted access to the legal labor market,” said Jana Häberlein, who also referred to a 2019 study by the Federal Commission on Migration (FCM).
As a result of the work ban, rejected asylum seekers often receive emergency aid for years, which means an “unforeseeable period of waiting” for them and causes costs for the state, she explained: “This waste of human capital and individual life plans must be clearly criticized from a health, human rights, social and economic perspective.” If people remain in long-term emergency aid because they cannot return to their country of origin, they should urgently be given the opportunity to participate in the labor market, she said.
The topics of the panel discussion
The panel discussion, led by moderator Inés Mateos, focused in the first part on discretionary powers between the law and reality and in the second part on politics.
The topic of (gainful) employment and employment, the often grueling time of waiting for long-term emergency assistance (LAB) until the hardship regulation for people from the asylum sector after five years of residence in Switzerland provided a lively topic of discussion. It also dealt with access to integration and proof of identity, the “dilemma” between enforcement and individual case support as well as the “back and forth” between the cantons and the federal administration, a peculiarity of the federalist system in Switzerland.
The votes of the panel guests
Dieter von Blarer is a lawyer in the field of migration and President of Humanrights.ch. He knows from his own experience that if asylum seekers are given access to a job, such as an internship, in an extraordinary procedure, “their self-confidence changes massively”, he said. “Unstructured unemployment” does not strengthen asylum seekers in emergency aid and prevents their integration. However, it is a prerequisite for a hardship application to be approved, according to Dieter von Blarer: “How far can you go to keep people out of work in order to enforce the state’s migration law? And when do the human rights of individuals begin, namely that they should have access to work?” For him, one thing is clear: “It is strategically wrong to link immigration policy with labor policy.”
“For a hardship permit, the question of identity must be clarified,” said Claudio Martelli, Deputy Director of the SEM and Head of the Asylum Directorate. He showed understanding for the fact that those affected are in a difficult situation. According to Claudio Martelli, the SEM has the role of the legislator, which examines the hardship applications of rejected asylum seekers “with care”. However, if people do not cooperate in establishing their identity and, for example, do not make an effort to obtain their identity papers from their country’s embassy, the application cannot be approved, even if the SEM is aware that this has “major consequences for the people concerned”, he said.
Deputy Director SEM, Head of the Asylum Directorate
“Enforcement is ultimately a matter for the cantons,” says Andreas Räss, Head of the Basel-Landschaft Office for Migration and Citizens’ Rights. Every case is different. In BL, individual case reviews are the order of the day, which puts them in the comfortable position of knowing all those affected. “However, we cannot move freely, there are framework conditions from the federal government, jurisdiction and politics,” said Andreas Räss. He spoke of a “dilemma” for a cantonal authority: “On the one hand, we want to ensure good integration and, on the other hand, we should make the stay as unattractive as possible for rejected asylum seekers and then still expect people to be well integrated for the regulation.”
Head of the Office for Migration
and Civil Rights BL
He reported that over 80 percent of the hardship applications that the canton of BL submits to the SEM are approved. The statutory five years before a hardship application can be submitted in Bern is a “very long time, especially for children and young people in education”, said Andreas Räss. In Baselland, a hardship application is therefore submitted much more quickly if children are affected, “because the future prospects are decisive here”, he said: “Young people stay here for a long time and should also have a chance to make constructive use of their lives.”
Finally, SP National Councillor Samira Marti, an economist by profession, spoke plainly. Emergency aid is “a dead end” and was designed as a temporary solution. “We must not write laws that don’t work in reality,” she said, referring to long-term emergency aid recipients. “Linking labor law with social policy is inadmissible,” she said. She therefore expects the legislators to make adjustments.
It is not acceptable to “lump everyone together” when it comes to hardship applications, she said, addressing the SEM. Each individual case must be examined. “If, after 15 years of the emergency aid regime, we realize that it does not work for most people and that deportations cannot be implemented, it is necessary to increase the number of hardship applications,” said the left-wing parliamentarian. Anything else would be a “correction of the legislation by the federal administration”. “There is still a lot to do,” she concluded.
Solution approaches with reality check
Sylvia Valentin from terre des hommes schweiz concluded the stimulating panel discussion with the remark that the report and the event showed: “There are solutions that can improve the situation of those affected.” This requires the will of all those involved, she said, “and a systematic reality check as to whether rejected asylum seekers are actually granted the humane existence to which they are legally entitled”.
What we demand
“Asylum seekers receiving emergency assistance should be able to work, attend school or do an apprenticeship and live in decent accommodation,” says Sylvia Valentin, migration officer at terre des hommes schweiz.
terre des hommes schweiz demands:
- Solutions are needed that enable those affected to live in dignity and that also make more sense in socio-political and economic terms than the current system.
- Pragmatic solutions must be found quickly within the existing legal possibilities. In the longer term, however, a change in the legal requirements is desirable.
- The emergency aid system must do justice to the reality of the people receiving it.
- The basic attitude towards rejected asylum seekers in emergency aid must change.
