![Sample our Politics & International Relations journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5947/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Politics-International-Relations.jpg"})
Abstract
This article mainly fills a gap in the English-speaking literature on the recall in Switzerland in order to allow for future comparative work. After a historical introduction, the reasons for the introduction, institutional rules as well as practice of the recall are assembled in an inductive but systematic way. Currently the recall in Switzerland only exists in a minority of 6 of 26 cantons but not on the national level. The procedure is usually directed at parliament, the government or both. So far there was only one successful recall vote in the Canton of Aargau in the year 1862. This particular case is therefore described in more detail. Furthermore, a comprehensive overview of all recall attempts and votes is drawn up. As a conclusion stemming from the Swiss case, we can come up with three main functions the recall fulfils in a political system: (a) catharsis in case of scandals or mismanagement, (b) political weapon to gain public attention or to maximise votes in the next election, (c) indirect measure to oppose a contested policy.
ORCID
Uwe Serdült http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2383-3158
Notes
1. The linguistic barrier is also responsible for a lack of information on the Polish (Piasecki Citation2011: 131) and German cases (Fuchs [Citation2007]; Wollmann [Citation2004: 155]) where the use of recall is also on the rise.
2. There has been only one case at the national level so far: Elisabeth Kopp, the first women elected into national government, had to step down in 1988 because of her husband's business activities.
3. The same indirect procedure existed for Canton Zurich in its 1869 Constitution. A successful citizens' initiative for a total revision of the constitution led to new elections (see Art. 65, Sec. 2) and thus represented an indirect recall of parliament (Hangartner and Kley Citation2000: 640). In many other cantons, the same approach would have led to the election of a constitutional assembly (Kölz [Citation1998: 68]; Tornic and Massüger [Citation2013]). Also: Corti (Citation1992: 19) for the Canton of Ticino.
4. Several other cantons discussed the introduction of recall but in the end did not incorporate it into their constitutions: Vaud in 1845, Geneva in 1847 (Kölz Citation1998: 70–72), then Vaud again for its most recent 2003 Constitution.
5. However, the provision for recall was still listed in the draft version of 2004 (§33).
6. This change of the cantonal constitution triggered a mandatory constitutional referendum. Recall as a new direct democracy mechanism at the local level was accepted on 7 March 2010 with 58.5% in favour (see: www.c2d.ch).
7. The option to recall Council of State members was available in Canton Vaud until 1931 and Canton Neuchâtel until 1944 (Hangartner and Kley Citation2000: 637).
8. The bill was also a reaction to increasing diplomatic pressure and complaints from the USA, France and The Netherlands (Mattioli Citation1998: 137).
9. Before the 1848 Constitution discrimination of Jews in Swiss cantons was the norm rather than relating particularly to Aargau. Bern was the first to abrogate special laws for Jews in 1847 and Vaud has never even had any since becoming a proper canton in 1803 (Mattioli Citation1998: 135).
Additional information
Uwe Serdült is vice-director of the Centre for Research on Direct Democracy (www.c2d.ch). He holds a doctoral degree in Political Science from the University of Zurich, worked as a senior researcher and lecturer at the ETH Zurich, as well as the Universities of Zurich and Geneva, respectively. Research stays lead him to Poland (PU Krakow), Japan (Waseda and Ritsumeikan University) and the USA (University of Pittsburgh, PA). His research interests include direct and electronic democracy. Last year, he published the Swiss chapter on direct democracy in Matt Qvortrups edited book Referendums Around the World.