Opinions diverge on the ban on begging

After the European Court of Human Rights whistles Switzerland back in its enforcement of the ban on begging, the question arises as to the future of the ban on begging in the Canton of Zug.

In a decision of 19 January 2021, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) criticised Switzerland for its treatment of a beggar. This arose from the case of a 28-year-old Roma who earned her living as a beggar in Geneva. As begging is prohibited in the canton of Geneva, as in just over half of all Swiss cantons, the Roma beggar was sentenced to a fine of CHF 500. Because she couldn’t pay, she was detained for 5 days.

The 28-year-old took her case to the Federal Court, where her appeal was dismissed. She then moved on to the ECHR, which agreed with her. The Court of Justice based its judgement on Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which deals with respect for private and family life. The ECHR argued that people in financial need must be allowed to draw public attention to their situation and ask for handouts. Although the fines against the Roma beggar were in compliance with the law of the Canton of Geneva, the law itself, i.e. the ban on begging and its enforcement, was problematic.

No begging problem in the canton of Zug
Following this ruling by the highest human rights body in Europe, the cantonal laws banning begging are now likely to face some problems. The canton of Zug also bans begging. There was a major debate in the Cantonal Council about the introduction of the ban in 2012, and a ban has been in place in the canton of Zug since then, with infringements punishable by a fine of CHF 100.

But is there a begging problem in the canton of Zug at all? The government councillor and head of the Security Directorate, Beat Villiger, says 'no' and thereby makes a distinction between the Geneva case that reached the ECHR and the situation in Zug. "Begging is a local problem that we hardly know in the canton of Zug," he says.

"In Zug, we are more likely to have to do something about too many street musicians, and they are exempt from the ban on begging."

The ban on begging in the canton of Zug is intended, in particular, to combat organised begging gangs, such as frequently travel into Swiss cities from countries such as Rumania. Villiger also adds: "Switzerland has a social system in which no one should need to beg," and this justifies a ban on begging.

The canton of Zug also bans begging
Stock photo

With regard to the decision of the ECHR, Villiger adds: "We will have the court decision examined internally and, if necessary, will adapt the cantonal law if it contradicts the judgment." This applies for all court decisions if they are found to be not in accordance with our laws. "It would be disastrous if our cantonal law did not comply with the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights."

Organised begging is not worthwhile in Zug
Cantonal Councillor Andreas Lustenberger does not believe that the judgment of the ECHR will have an impact on the legal situation in the canton of Zug. He explains: "In the small canton of Zug, organised begging, as we have seen it in larger cities, would not be worthwhile anyway." Nevertheless, begging is a problem that is not entirely absent in Switzerland. "The queues of people for food handouts, such as we have seen in recent months, show that the Swiss social system has gaps," adds Andreas Lustenberger.

"Politics and society have a shared responsibility here to combat poverty in Switzerland more strongly." He considers the decision of the ECHR to be correct, because the question of proportionality arises in the punishment of the Roma beggar.

Manuel Brandenberg, SVP cantonal councillor (Swiss People’s Party), also supports the decision of the Strasbourg court. "Why shouldn't someone be able to beg if they can’t get help quickly?" As a lawyer, Manuel Brandenberg also knows how to assess the legal situation, and can compare the Zug ban with that of the canton of Geneva.

"The decision could also affect the ban on begging in the canton of Zug, which is also formulated in an absolute manner, without stating any nuances that could affect the individual case."

He adds: "The absolute ban that currently applies could be lifted or formulated in a more nuanced way by the Cantonal Council, so that it is in line with the requirements of the ECHR decision."

Opinions on the impact of the ECHR decision on the ban on begging in Zug therefore diverge. It’s clear that the cantonal law will have to be reviewed. But whether it needs to be adapted remains to be seen.