Zum Inhalt
Verein in Gründung
Pilotbetrieb

Diese Plattform befindet sich im Pilotbetrieb. Trotz sorgfältiger Prüfung können Inhalte und Funktionen Fehler enthalten. Bitte überprüfe wichtige Angaben anhand der verlinkten Originalquellen.

SW-Version alpha 0.41
Darstellung: System
Sprache: DE

Restriction of Freedom of Action

Summary: The Federal Council and leading constitutional law scholars warn: "permanent" precludes any situational adaptation. 175 years of proven flexible neutrality practice would be constitutionally restricted.

1. Voices from Law and Politics

  • Rene Rhinow (constitutional law scholar, former FDP Council of States member): "Narrowing the concept of neutrality is gross folly. 'Permanently neutral' is outdated." He warns of a "dangerous elevation" [1].
  • Federal Councillor Cassis: "Fossilisation would undermine its strength" [2].
  • Elisabeth Schneider-Schneiter (The Centre): "Strategic self-shackling disguised as principled stance" [3].
  • GLP: Constitutional codification would inappropriately restrict in future crisis situations [4].

2. 175 Years of Flexible Neutrality

Switzerland has repeatedly adapted its neutrality policy since 1815: League of Nations accession 1920, UN accession 2002, PfP since 1996, sanctions 2022. This adaptability is considered a strength [5].

3. Counter-arguments of the Supporters

  • Clear rules create predictability [6]. Note: Position paper of the initiative committee
  • Austria also has neutrality enshrined in its constitution
  • 87% support neutrality -- constitutional anchoring as a democratic consequence

References

[1] Tagesanzeiger (2024). Rhinow on neutrality. [Open Access]
[2] NZZ (2025). Cassis on flexible neutrality. [Open Access]
[3] SRF (2026). National Council debate. [Open Access]
[4] GLP (2024). Position Statement. Note: Position paper of the GLP
[5] FDFA (2024). Switzerland's Neutrality. [Open Access]
[6] neutralitaet-ja.ch (2024). Argumentarium. Note: Position paper of the initiative committee

Last updated: March 2026