BERLIN – Swiss voters on Sunday approved a proposal to ban facial coverings, both niqabs and burqas worn by some Muslim women in the country, and ski masks and bandanas worn by protesters.
The measure will prohibit covering one’s face in public places such as restaurants, sports stadiums, public transport or simply walking down the street. It provides for exceptions in religious places and for safety or health reasons, such as face masks that people now wear to protect themselves against COVID-19, as well as for traditional Carnival celebrations. Authorities have two years to draft detailed legislation.
Two cantons or Swiss states, Ticino and St. Gallen, already have similar legislation providing for fines for transgressions. National legislation will align Switzerland with countries such as Belgium and France that have already taken similar measures.
The Swiss government had opposed the measure as excessive, arguing that full coverage is a “marginal phenomenon”. He argued that the ban could harm tourism: most Muslim women wearing this veil in Switzerland are visitors to Persian Gulf states with heels, which are often attracted to the cities of the Swiss lake.
Experts estimate that at most a few dozen Muslim women wear full-face coatings in the country of 8.5 million people.
Proponents of the proposal, which was voted on five years after its launch, argued that full coverage symbolizes the repression of women and said the measure is necessary to maintain a basic principle that faces should be shown. in a free society like Switzerland.
In the end, 51.2% of voters supported the plan. There were majorities against it in six of Switzerland’s 26 cantons, including those in the country’s three largest cities, Zurich, Geneva and Basel, and the capital, Bern. Public television SRF reported that voters from several popular tourist destinations, including Interlaken, Lucerne and Zermatt, rejected it.
Among the sponsors was the nationalist Swiss People’s Party, which is the strongest in parliament. The committee that launched the proposal is led by a party lawmaker, Walter Wobmann, and also initiated a ban on the construction of new minarets that voters approved in 2009.
A coalition of left-wing parties that opposes the proposal put up signs before the referendum that said, “Absurd. Useless. Islamophobic ”.
Wobmann told SRF that the initiative dealt with both “a symbol of a completely different value system … an extremely radical Islam” and security against “thugs.” He said “this has nothing to do with symbolic politics.”
Voters voiced their opinion on two other issues Sunday. They clearly rejected a proposal for voluntary electronic identification to improve the security of online transactions, an idea that affected privacy advocates as it would have been issued by private companies, and narrowly approved a free agreement. trade with Indonesia.