Zurich’s Asylum System: A Comedy of Errors and Deportations
By your cheeky correspondent, the ultimate mishmash of Jimmy Carr’s wit, Rowan Atkinson’s clumsiness, Ricky Gervais’ sarcasm, and Lee Evans’ energy.
So, let’s talk about Zurich. A place known for chocolate, watches, and a deportation system that could double as a plot for a twisted sitcom. The headline reads, “Zurich consistently deports people, but the hurdles are high, as the example of Türkiye currently shows.” I mean, who knew that the land of cheese fondue and neutrality had such a flair for dramatic exits? Ever seen a deportation flight? Believe me, it’s less ‘The Sound of Music’ and more ‘The Sound of a Ticking Clock’.
The Real Stars: Mario Fehr and the Canton Police
Meet the star of our little drama: Mario Fehr. This guy claims, “Without the canton of Zurich, the Swiss asylum system would come to a standstill overnight.” Sounds like he’s putting the “fun” in “fundamental governance.” If Zurich is the backbone of the asylum system, then the other cantons must be suffering from chronic back pain – I can only imagine what their medical bills look like!
At Zurich Airport, they don’t just say “have a nice flight” – they might as well hand you a complimentary slice of cheese as you board! They’ve carried out around 3,400 returns last year alone, with almost 2,400 people already being sent packing this year. That’s a lot of unceremonious goodbyes—maybe they should start handing out “Get Out of Switzerland Free” cards!
An Airport with an Unusual Guest List
Ever thought about the logistics of deportation? It seems like a party planning nightmare. “For a single deportation flight, 30 to 50 cantonal police officers are deployed.” Imagine showing up ready to party only to find out it’s not a rave, it’s a ‘see-ya-later-hope-you-have-better-luck-next-time’ send-off! And, hey – they even travel with a few “guests” to make sure they don’t try to hitch a ride to Bali instead! As if anyone’s daring enough to escape the Swiss Alps for a tropical beach!
Repatriation: A Family Affair
Now, if you think this sounds too harsh, don’t worry—there’s a silver lining! They aim for some good ol’ “return assistance”. Instead of throwing people out on the street with nothing but a suitcase and a sad look, they throw in a few perks! A Turkish family of six got to leave with their budgie, because nothing says “home sweet home” like your feathered friend squawking on the way back to Türkiye! What’s next? A free bike or maybe a Swiss army knife?
A Complicated Game of Musical Chairs
But, of course, not everything is sunshine and rainbows, as asylum seekers from Turkey seem to be presenting a game of musical chairs with their applications. You’ve got cases of people entering with forged documents—kind of like showing up to the DMV with a picture of your pet dog as ID! It’s quite a conundrum. “Only about an eighth are Dublin-out cases,” says Mario, which sounds like a phrase you’d hear at a pub quiz. Let’s hope they don’t start asking who sent the most ‘Dublin-outs’ to autumn leaf festivals!
Trust Issues and Public Sentiment
Now, let’s get serious for a sec (don’t worry, it won’t last long). “If we don’t act consistently, one day we’ll get paid,” Fehr warns. Trust is dwindling; it seems it’s harder to maintain than a toddler’s attention span! Just last month, Zurich voters rejected scholarships to rejected asylum seekers as an expression of their dissatisfaction. Politicians everywhere are nodding sagely—dissatisfaction is the name of the game!
If Switzerland Were Italy…
But let’s count our blessings, because it could be worse. Just look at Italy, which has set up a reception camp in Albania. Fehr is shouting “we’re not there yet,” while half the Swiss population thinks they’re still waiting for the grass to grow. Meanwhile, polled politicians everywhere are sweating nervously because they know these are tricky waters to navigate.
So, What Now?
In the end, as we sit here with our melted cheese and chocolate, it’s clear that the Swiss asylum system is not just a matter of bureaucratic headaches, it’s a full-on farce with no intermission! The ‘what-ifs’ are aplenty—what if the Turks applied with real documents? What if Switzerland’s airport turned into a theme park? The imagination runs wild! But until then, my friends, let’s just laugh through the absurdity of it all—because if we don’t, we might actually start crying!
Zurich consistently deports people, but the hurdles are high, as the example of Türkiye currently shows.
Mario Fehr: “Without the canton of Zurich, the Swiss asylum system would come to a standstill overnight.”
Karin Hofer / NZZ
Anyone who has to leave Switzerland as a rejected asylum seeker is usually at Zurich Airport for the last time on Swiss soil. Four out of five repatriations go through the country’s largest airport.
The Zurich Canton Police are responsible for enforcement at the airport. It carried out around 3,400 returns last year. This year there are likely to be even more; In the first half of the year alone there were almost 2,400 people.
For a single deportation flight, 30 to 50 cantonal police officers are deployed on the ground. They look after the people until departure and accompany them to the plane. In certain cases, police officers also fly with you.
“If the canton of Zurich did not do this work for the federal government and the other cantons, the Swiss asylum system would come to a standstill overnight,” says Zurich security director Mario Fehr (independent).
It’s not always possible to go straight back home. Many cases are so-called Dublin-out procedures; People who either entered illegally via a Dublin country or who have already applied for asylum in a Dublin country will be returned there.
Even the budgies are allowed to fly along
In the week from October 3rd to 10th, for example, a Turkish family of six and a woman from Cameroon were sent to Austria, as well as an Algerian to the Netherlands. They were all assigned to the canton of Zurich in Switzerland.
Another family of six people voluntarily traveled to Colombia in the same week. In such cases, Switzerland offers support with return assistance. “Execution by consensus is always best,” says Fehr. “People should travel back to their homeland in dignity, and if they go voluntarily, then we will accommodate them. We’ve already sent bikes along – and even budgies.”
The criticism that rejected asylum seekers are granted such special wishes and even given them money to start their journey back home leaves Fehr cold. “Anyone who argues like that can’t do math. It costs us a lot more to support someone here in Switzerland for ten or twelve years than it does to get them on a plane in time and give them a little money before they take off.”
Overall, in the week mentioned, the number of rejected asylum seekers in emergency assistance in the canton of Zurich fell from 583 to 564 people. “It was a good week,” sums up Fehr. “When I became security director in 2011, we had around three times as many open cases as we do today.”
Not all cantons carry out returns as consistently as the canton of Zurich. In percentage terms, the pending cases are particularly high in western Swiss cantons such as Vaud.
“The federal government has the opportunity to hold these cantons that are unwilling to comply with their obligations, but unfortunately it is not doing enough,” says Fehr. The State Secretariat for Migration (SEM) writes that the differences between the cantons could have various reasons; a comparison is difficult.
What to do with the Turks?
But even Zurich cannot act in every case as it would like. At the moment it is mainly about one country: Turkey.
Many Turks apply for asylum in Switzerland with forged documents that are supposed to prove their persecution. The NZZ reported in July that a Turkish lawyer reported compatriots to the authorities at home because they had published anti-regime propaganda on the Internet. But his compatriots had paid him for exactly that. With the report they should be able to prove that they are at risk in their home country.
They should all leave Switzerland, but they don’t. “Only about an eighth are Dublin-out cases,” says Fehr. In other words, people who can be brought to the European country from which they entered Switzerland. The rest, around 70 people, would have to be deported directly to Turkey, but that is difficult.
Switzerland saw through this set-up, but repatriation is still difficult. At the beginning of October, 91 Turks were receiving emergency assistance as rejected asylum seekers in the canton of Zurich, more people than from any other country.
They would do everything they could to delay the process, says Fehr. There are multiple requests and requests for reconsideration. Above all, cooperation with the Turkish authorities is complicated. “Those who are required to leave the country must appear at the consulate,” says Fehr. “But you will only receive an appointment if you already have a plane ticket.” All family members always have to appear, and the entry document is then only valid for 30 days.
“All of this makes enforcement unnecessarily difficult,” says Fehr, who asked the SEM that the federal government intervene with Turkey so that returns could be made easier.
It remains unclear whether a solution can be expected soon. In response to a request from the NZZ, the SEM writes that it does not comment on negotiations with individual states.
Trust is dwindling
For Fehr, enforcement is an integral part of the asylum system. “We must consistently integrate recognized refugees, but we must just as consistently reject those who cannot stay,” he says. This is important if the state does not want to lose the population’s trust in the asylum system. “If we don’t act consistently, one day we’ll get paid.”
There are also signs in the canton of Zurich that trust is dwindling. In September, Zurich voters rejected granting scholarships to rejected asylum seekers who have been temporarily admitted. “It was only marginally about scholarships,” believes Fehr. “Above all, people wanted to express their dissatisfaction with federal policy in the asylum system.”
Swiss voters had already approved a modern right to asylum at the ballot box in 2016, and it has been in force since 2019. The idea at the time was that an asylum procedure should be legally completed within a year – including expulsion.
But there are still over 12,000 open cases at the federal level, says Fehr. «A huge mountain of pending work! The optimal number of open cases would be significantly lower, a maximum of 5,000.” If there are more, people stay too long, decisions are made too late and enforcement becomes difficult. “It is incomprehensible that the federal government is not finally moving forward with reducing the pending issues.”
The SEM writes that the reduction of pending applications is one of the priorities of EJPD boss Beat Jans. In February alone, the Federal Council approved 60 additional full-time positions. Since the end of 2023, the number of open cases has fallen from a good 15,600 to 12,400 at the end of September. It is planned that the number of first instance cases could be reduced to 5,800 by the end of 2026.
No camps like the Italians
Other countries also have to find new solutions for the waves of asylum seekers. Germany has introduced stricter border controls. Poland, confronted with asylum seekers entering via Belarus, even wants to partially repeal the right to asylum. Italy, in turn, has set up a reception camp in Albania, and Great Britain wanted to bring asylum seekers to Rwanda under the conservative government that has since been voted out, but the plans were suspended.
A similar approach is currently not necessary for Switzerland, says Fehr. “But we have to monitor developments in our neighboring countries very carefully.” There can be no talk of an “asylum chaos,” as the SVP calls it. “Our asylum system works if we implement it consistently.” This is also fair to the applicants. They have a right to find out quickly whether they can stay or not.
Fehr points out that every change, every delay and every opening is immediately registered in the countries of origin and by the criminal smuggling gangs. “These people don’t just run at random,” he says. “Their traffickers know exactly where they are going to direct them.”
This is also reflected in the Zurich statistics of rejected asylum seekers who only receive emergency assistance. Among the top ten nationalities is a country that is hardly ever an issue in the asylum debate: Burundi.
The fact that the small East African country appears so high has to do with a European country – Serbia. The Balkan republic is neither in the EU nor part of the Dublin asylum system, but it is a neighbor of both and until recently allowed Egyptians, Burundians, Tunisians, Indians and Cubans, among others, visa-free entry.
They also came, but of course not to marvel at the beauties of Belgrade, but simply to get from Serbia to the EU and the Dublin asylum system. It is only 100 kilometers from Belgrade Airport to the Croatian border.
Serbia only tightened its visa requirements under pressure from the EU and Switzerland, but the effects are reverberating, including at Zurich Airport: One of the most common destinations for Dublin-out flights is still Zagreb, the capital of Croatia.
