SHARE
COPY LINK
OPINION

Give us a vote: we’ve got most to lose if UK quits

Brits in the rest of the EU should all be given a vote in the country’s upcoming referendum - as should Europeans who live in the UK. We’re the ones with most to lose, argues The Local's managing editor James Savage.

Give us a vote: we've got most to lose if UK quits
2.2 million Brits live in another EU country. 2.3 million people from elsewhere in the EU live in the UK. Photo: Charles Clegg.

Who is more affected if Britain leaves the EU: the South African student living in the UK for six months or the German who has lived there and paid taxes for fifteen years? The Indian working in the City for a couple of years before moving back to Mumbai, or the British pensioner who retired to Spain in 2002?

Some time in the next year or two there will be a referendum on whether the UK leaves the EU. 

In a bizarre anomaly, if you’re one of the million people from the rest of the Commonwealth living in the UK, you will likely be given the vote (as you are in general elections) – but you won’t if you’re one of the 2.3 million people from another European country, or if you are British and have lived outside the UK for more than fifteen years. 

As I left the UK in 2003 I’ll probably get the vote if the referendum is held in 2017, but it will be a close-run thing. Millions of others who moved slightly longer ago will be deprived of a say.  

If you’re one of the 2.2 million Brits who lives in another EU country, it might not always feel like Europe made your move easier. 

When I came to Sweden I was made to line up at the Migration Board office with everyone else for a stamp in my passport. That certainly didn’t feel like free movement (they’ve streamlined things since then, I hear); in Italy, one British woman told us how she was made to wait two years for her official paperwork to be sorted out.

But, in reality, these hurdles are minor compared with what non-Europeans face. And our rights are part and parcel of the European project.

Just ask a non-European about their experiences at the visa office. One Canadian friend who split up with her boyfriend recently found that in addition to dealing with the emotional fallout, the split meant she lost her visa – and with it her right to work over here. 

Ah, some people say, but Britain will negotiate a good deal if it leaves. Look at Norway or Switzerland – it’s easy to move there. 

Maybe it will, but why should EU governments give the UK – or its citizens – an easy ride if it breaks up the Union? They won’t want other potential quitters to think they can have their cake and eat it by keeping the fun bits like freedom of movement, while jettisoning the boring bits like environmental legislation.

Those of us who have moved within the EU, either to or from Britain, are those who lose most if Britain quits. We’ve planned our lives, our loves, our jobs around an arrangement that we had every right to think would be permanent. 

Yet as things stand, we are unlikely even to be consulted. 

None of this is yet certain – and we won’t know exactly what the government’s planning until David Cameron presents the EU Referendum Bill to the House of Commons in a week or two. Then MPs will have a chance to amend and vote on the proposal.

The EU is far from perfect, God knows. It certainly needs reforming. But it has also provided opportunities for millions. Over the next few months, The Local will make sure that the voice of people who have gained most from Europe – and have most to lose if Britain quits – are heard loud and clear.

 

Member comments

Log in here to leave a comment.
Become a Member to leave a comment.
For members

EUROPEAN UNION

Why does Switzerland have to comply with European court rulings?

Europe's top rights court ruled that Switzerland was not doing enough to tackle climate change, condemning it to a hefty fee. But why does Switzerland have to abide by this decision?

Why does Switzerland have to comply with European court rulings?

In a landmark ruling handed down on April 9th, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in Strasbourg sided with a group of Swiss pensioners who ‘sued’ the country for not doing enough to mitigate the effects of global warming. 

The ECHR ruled that Switzerland had violated Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which guarantees the “right to respect for private and family life,” and ordered the government to pay the complainants a fine of €80,000 (78,555 francs). 

READ ALSO: Who are Switzerland’s victorious climate ‘Elders’? 

While environmental groups and a number of political parties welcomed the verdict, questions also arose about why Switzerland, which is not a member of the EU, must comply with the decision handed down by the Council of Europe’s court.

This fact was not lost on the populist, anti-EU Swiss People’s Party (SVP).

One of its MPs, Jean-Luc Addor, questioned not only the court’s judgment, but also the fact that foreign judges have ‘meddled’ in Swiss matters.

“What is the legitimacy of the ECHR to pronounce such a ‘condemnation’?,” he asked.” Is it now going to send the European army to Switzerland?”

So why is Switzerland obligated to conform to the ECHR’s judgment? 

In 1974, the country, though neutral, signed the European Convention on Human Rights.

As the European court was established expressly to monitor the parties’ compliance with the provisions enshrined in the Convention, Switzerland must heed its judgements. (The ECHR hears only matters related to human rights. It does not handle any criminal cases).

To ensure that rulings are just and impartial, the ECHR’s judges come from the 46 countries that ratified the Convention.

Switzerland is represented by Andreas Zünd, who has served on the ECHR since January 2021.

How do Swiss cases end up in front of ECHR judges?

Switzerland has different court levels: district, cantonal, and federal.

Complainants first file their cases in the district court. If they are not happy with the verdict, they can appeal it within 30 days, at which point the case will go to the higher judicial level, that is, the cantonal court.

The next step up the judicial ladder is the Federal Supreme court, the highest judicial authority in Switzerland.

Headquartered in Lausanne, it is the final instance on all appeals against decisions of the cantonal courts.

But though this final judgment can’t be appealed in Switzerland, the case  — if it relates to rights outlined in the Convention — can be taken to the ECHR.

READ ALSO: What you should know about Switzerland’s courts 

What ‘Swiss cases’ have been judged by the European court?

The climate activists’ case is the latest of dozens of rulings involving complaints from Switzerland. 

Some of the other successful ones involved a widower whose pension benefits were denied by a Swiss court; a Romanian woman fined for beginning in Geneva; and a Sudanese man who won his appeal against deportation from Switzerland

You can see all the ECHR rulings for Switzerland (in German or French) for the last 45 years here.

SHOW COMMENTS