[ad_1]
Are the Zurich courts on a “cuddle course” with criminal foreigners? And how should winter Corona help catering and retail? Parliament addressed these issues on Monday.
Patio heaters are allowed, but only if they are powered by renewable energy.
Criminal foreigners should be deported: almost 53 percent of the Swiss electorate decided in 2010 when the deportation initiative was accepted. But even ten years after the vote, the issue of referrals remains controversial. Contrary to what was initially requested by the SVP, not all foreigners convicted of certain crimes will be automatically deprived of their right of residence.
In the canton of Zurich, out of 547 criminal foreigners, 249 had to leave the country last year. The so-called deprivation clause applied to the other 55 percent. This is demonstrated by the figures published by the Federal Statistical Office (BfS) in the summer. The clause states that the courts may exceptionally refrain from the referral if this would cause serious difficulties for the foreigner and the public interests in the referral do not outweigh the private interests of the foreigner in remaining in Switzerland.
The clause approved by the Council of States was a thorn in the side of the SVP from the beginning. René Truninger (svp., Illnau-Effretikon) said on Monday at the cantonal council: “The hardship clause should only be used in extreme exceptional cases. They spoke of 5 percent. The fact that it is now 55 percent is concerning, even if the quality of the numbers can be questioned. “
In an urgent postulate, Truninger, together with Linda Camenisch (fdp., Wallisellen) and Thomas Lamprecht (edu., Bassersdorf), demand a report from the governing council on the prior application of the hardship clause. In addition to the number of cases, the reasons for them must also be disclosed in summary form.
Zurich prosecutor’s office for standardized statistics
The figures that existed so far must be viewed with caution. The waiver of a national reference does not always have to do with the application of the hardship clause. For example, people from an EU country cannot be deported due to the Free Movement Agreement. In many cases, it is not the court that applies the hardship clause, but the de facto prosecutor. In the so-called criminal order procedure, it can judge smaller prison cases of a maximum of six months on its own, but cannot issue referrals.
Upon request, the Zurich prosecutor said: “The figures from the Federal Statistical Office are at variance with the figures compiled by the Zurich prosecutor’s own office.” A joint in-depth analysis of all federal and cantonal actors is needed to find out how the discrepancy between the numbers can be explained and how the quality of the data can be increased.
In particular, the hardship clause was used in only 94 cases in 2019 in proceedings completed at the prosecution level with a sanction order. For comparison: the Zurich prosecutor’s office issued a total of around 15,000 sanction orders in 2019.
The move drew critical dissenting votes in the Council. Davide Loss (sp., Adliswil), a lawyer by profession, described the lawsuits as a “huge bureaucratic monster”. The reasons for the application of the hardship clause are so complex that it is not even possible to determine them in detail, not even in summary form. That is the nature of the matter, as each case is an individual case. “The postulate is unnecessary, the judiciary is working properly.” If the numbers surveyed raised a question, it was whether the defined catalog of acts that led to the deportation was not very comprehensive.
In the end, however, the votes in favor predominated and the postulate was approved with 99 to 67 votes.
No to patio heaters
Once again, the effects of the pandemic on business were debated in parliament. With mushroom heaters, tents, longer opening hours and pedestrian plugs against the Crown crisis: in an urgent postulate, cantonal councilors Marc Bourgeois (fdp., Zurich) and Jürg Sulser (svp., Otelfingen) called for a non-bureaucratic help for hungry industries like gastronomy and hospitality and retail.
Since many people avoided indoor spaces due to the increased risk of infection, these companies suffered more and more losses during the cold season. The applicants argued that an intervention of the canton in the municipal powers could relieve the municipalities to the extent that they would not have to temporarily adapt innumerable ordinances and regulations themselves.
The corresponding proposal was presented at the end of August. It was not until eleven weeks later that the Zurich City Council debated the definitive move in the exhibition hall. The governing council had already commented on the request at the end of September and concluded that it was the responsibility of the municipalities to be flexible within the framework of building regulations. The director of the building, Martin Neukom (gp.), Said at the cantonal council: “I explicitly ask the municipalities to use flexibility to support the hospitality industry.” The city of Zurich, for example, has already largely implemented the demands of the postulate.
The applicant Jürg Sulser, on the other hand, argued that it was precisely a matter of relieving the municipalities with an intervention of the canton in the powers of the municipality. She received help from Claudia Hollenstein (Glp., Stäfa). He warned against a patchwork quilt if municipalities were reluctant to simplify permits. However, the GLP rejected the postulate. “We are always lagging behind the current situation with interventions,” Hollenstein said, referring to the long processing time of the approaches.
Even with the Council’s left, the measure met with little approval. The postulate brought a lot of noise and little effect, said Thomas Forrer (gp., Erlenbach). Cities and municipalities already had the flexibility to allow mobile structures such as tents and barracks. Patio heaters are also allowed if they run on sustainable energy. Forrer added: “Even then, we don’t think it makes sense. We recommend that you try a wool blanket. “It seems that applicants are living their dreams of deregulation under the guise of the pandemic.
The Cantonal Council rejected the postulate at the end with 93 to 74 votes.
