Summary

Federal Councillor Beat Jans spoke on 28 May 2026 before the delegate assembly of the Association of Swiss Police Officers (VSPB) in Davos. He warned against the initiative "No 10-Million Switzerland," which will be put to a vote on 14 June. Jans argued that the initiative weakens internal security rather than strengthening it because it endangers the bilateral treaties and thus cooperation with the EU. Police would lose access to European security databases without Schengen/Dublin access. At the same time, Jans announced new measures to combat organized crime and violence.

Persons

  • Beat Jans (Federal Councillor, Head of the Department of Justice and Police)

Topics

  • Internal security and police cooperation
  • Initiative "No 10-Million Switzerland"
  • Bilateral treaties with the EU
  • Organized crime
  • Schengen/Dublin association

Clarus Lead

The upcoming vote on the immigration initiative will be a security test for Switzerland. Jans made clear that accepting the initiative will not—as supporters promise—create more security, but rather massively hinder police investigative work. The central point: Without Schengen/Dublin access, Swiss police officers will have to search for criminals in the future "virtually flying blind." This endangers the successful prosecution of cross-border crime at a time when autocracies threaten freedom and the rule of law.

Detailed Summary

Jans emphasized that the population trusts the police strongly—a finding of the ETH study "Security 2026." However, the threat situation is tense: organized crime operates internationally, human trafficking, terrorism, cybercrime, and burglar gangs operate across borders.

The initiative promises security through limiting immigration to 10 million inhabitants, but would have the opposite effect. Asylum makes up only 8 percent of immigration—a reduction to 40,000 immigrants per year would necessarily require a massive restriction of freedom of movement. This would automatically result in the termination of the Bilateral I and endanger Schengen/Dublin. The EU made clear after the mass immigration initiative of 2014 that all agreements are interconnected.

Specifically, the loss of Schengen association would mean: police and border protection would no longer have access to European security databases. Today, Swiss police officers conduct hundreds of queries daily. British colleagues experienced how tedious this is after Brexit. Jans pointed to recent successes in crime fighting—four alleged mafiosi in Roveredo, nine ATM robbers in Holland, a drug ring in Basel—which were only possible through international cooperation.

On the asylum issue: Without Schengen/Dublin, Switzerland would become an "asylum island." Persons rejected in EU countries could file applications here in the future. Today, Switzerland transfers significantly more asylum seekers than it accepts. The figures show positive trends: in 2025 there were 15 percent fewer asylum applications than in 2023, in the first quarter of 2026 another 15 percent fewer. Security incidents in federal asylum centers fell by 63 percent, arrests of irregularly entered persons by 70 percent.

Jans also announced: The Federal Council has defined for the first time with the cantons a national strategy against organized crime. A new draft law to combat domestic violence is under parliamentary review. The national police research platform POLAP is to simplify data exchange between cantons. Federalism is not an obstacle to security, but requires close cooperation—this is Switzerland's strength.

Key Statements

  • The initiative "No 10-Million Switzerland" weakens internal security by endangering bilateral treaties and Schengen/Dublin access
  • Without access to European security databases, police investigative work is significantly hindered
  • International cooperation is key to prosecuting organized, cross-border crime
  • Asylum numbers are already declining; the initiative would turn Switzerland into an "asylum island"
  • New national strategies against organized crime and violence are being implemented

Critical Questions

  1. Evidence/Data Quality: How reliable are the comparative figures on Schengen withdrawal scenarios? Is the warning of "flying blind" based on concrete analyses of data query volume, or on analogies (e.g., Brexit experiences)?

  2. Conflicts of Interest: To what extent are Jans' statements on the initiative's impact shaped by the government position? Have initiators proposed alternative scenarios for data security that were not addressed?

  3. Causality: Is it documented that the four mafia cases and nine ATM robber arrests actually depended on Schengen data access? Or would national/bilateral channels have sufficed?

  4. Asylum Logic: If asylum applications already declined by 30 percent in 2025–2026, what factors drive this decline? Is this an argument for or against the initiative?

  5. Feasibility: How realistic is the scenario that the initiative automatically terminates Schengen/Dublin? Are there parliamentary or diplomatic scenarios that could prevent termination?

  6. Side Effects: What economic costs result from the loss of freedom of movement in healthcare and other sectors? Are these factored into the security balance?

Bibliography

Primary Source: Speech by Federal Councillor Beat Jans to the VSPB delegate assembly, Davos, 28.05.2026 – https://www.news.admin.ch/de/newnsb/qV42fA0s0570CwlJJ2_TE

Verification Status: ✓ 28.05.2026

This text was created with the support of an AI model. Editorial responsibility: clarus.news | Fact-checking: 28.05.2026