Federal Department of Justice and Police FDJP Federal Office for Migration FOM Reference/Document no.: COO.2180.101.7.182039 / 323.22/2010/01427 Date/Our ref.: 26 January 2012/ Description of Switzerland’s IBM 1 model Introduction Based on the EU’s integrated border management system, Switzerland’s IBM model comprises a number of mutually dependent levels. This document describes the various levels (general goals, strategic guidelines, individual objectives and problem areas) and their interdependencies. The IBM model pursues a number of general goals, found in the same or a similar form in all relevant EU strategy papers on integrated border management, i.e. within the Stockholm Programme. These also form an integral component of Switzerland’s migration policy. The general goals can be divided into two groups according to their function: repressive measures (left of the model) and those facilitating human rights and freedom of movement (right of the model). As both sides are of equal importance, it is important to strike the right balance between them so as to guarantee a common space of freedom, security and justice. This is achieved using a strategy covering problem analysis, problem inventory, individual objectives and an action plan. These elements are broken down according to the four-filter model used in the Schengen Area, comprising four complementary tiers of immigration control. This model assumes that measures to ensure efficient and successful prevention of illegal immigration should begin before the Schengen external border, in the countries of origin or transit, and should also include measures within the Schengen Area. Activities in countries of origin or transit form the first filter in the prevention of illegal immigration and cross-border crime. 2 The second filter covers bilateral and multilateral cooperation with other countries (primarily Schengen Member States) in a joint effort to combat illegal immigration and cross-border crime. 3 The third filter encompasses the control 1 Integrated Border Management For example, a typical first-filter activity is the visa procedure (which will soon be improved with the introduction of VIS to issue biometric visas). Another typical instrument that has proven successful (although not yet used by Switzerland) is Airline Liaison Officers (ALO), who assist airlines in performing their duties of diligence (document control) with consulting and training activities. 3 As well as readmission agreements with other Schengen States, second-filter measures also include, for example, participation in various European and international organisations. 2 activities carried out at the Schengen external border, 4 while the fourth filter covers all measures taken within the Schengen Area to prevent illegal immigration. 5 This model, recognised in the context of Schengen, also serves as the basis for Switzerland’s integrated border management model. Four-filter model (component of the EU’s system of integrated border management) Filter 1: Filter 2: Filter 3: Filter 4: Activities in third countries Cooperation within the Schengen Aera Measures at border control Measures within the territory e.g. e.g. e.g. e.g. Visa procedure FRONTEX Schengen-compliant control of external border Targeted internal controls Airline Liaison Officer (ALO) Liaison Office/ -Officers Automated border control Measures to detect forgeries Council Study Group Advanced Passenger Information (API) Enforcement Migration Attachés Cooperation with / sanctioning of airlines Entry-Exit-System (EES) Registered Traveller Program (RTP) Illegal immigration / cross-border crime © BFM/SGG, 2011 Legitimate immigration Although the impetus for formulating an integrated border management strategy came from Switzerland’s association with Schengen, and the strategy must therefore be integrated into a multilateral environment, the Swiss border management strategy must also be aligned with the country’s own internal security policy. The Federal Council’s final report on the Malama postulate raises fundamental issues regarding the division of responsibilities in the safeguarding of internal security in parallel with the work on an integrated border management strategy. Although some of these issues also play a role in the formulation of an integrated border management strategy, they cannot be resolved by the IBM Strategy Group but only within the context of the task force on the Malama postulate. 4 The third filter focuses on technical innovations to assist in border control, such as the Registered Traveller Programme (RTP) or Advance Passenger Information (API). 5 This covers all measures serving either to improve the probability of detection and/or to improve/accelerate implementation. 2/30 General goals The general goals can be described as follows. Key contribution to preventing illegal immigration, particularly people smuggling Illegal immigration takes the form of persons attempting to cross a border without appropriate authorisation as well as the activities of international people-smuggling networks that facilitate or enable illegal entry of migrants. Correspondingly, measures to combat illegal immigration must include improvements in verifying entry requirements as well as improvements in combating people smuggling by organised international networks. In following this objective, integrated border management intentionally focuses on the various forms of illegal immigration; it does not cover the far wider field of irregular immigration, as not all forms of immigration outside of the designated channels (e.g. an unaccompanied minor asylum seeker) are classified as abusive and unlawful and thus to be prevented. Contribution to combating cross-border crime Combating illegal immigration is not an end in itself: it is done because illegal immigration is often the origin, prerequisite or consequence of many forms of cross-border crime. For example, illegal immigration is often associated with and/or followed by criminal activities ranging from human trafficking, facilitation of illegal entry, drug trafficking, criminal tourism (burglaries and car theft or hijacking in border areas) and unreported employment, to other offences such as terrorist acts or preparations for such attacks. Therefore, integrated border management should also seek to combat such activities. These should be distinguished, however, from other cross-border crimes that do not actually involve immigration, such as money laundering or cybercrime. Such offences cannot be adequately prevented with border management instruments, which are ultimately designed to control persons who have crossed or intend to cross the border. Facilitation of legitimate entry for the travelling public In a globalised world, there is much interest in ensuring fast and simple entry procedures for legitimate travellers. An integrated border management strategy should therefore ensure that the entry procedure is not unnecessarily hindered or complicated by the measures taken in its name. This is especially so when Switzerland has a particular interest in the legitimate entry of certain people (e.g. from the main countries of tourist origin). Border management measures should take such national interests into account. Making the entry procedures as fast and simple as possible for the travelling public is also in the interests of the border control agencies themselves, enabling them to concentrate their limited resources on passengers of doubtful legitimacy. Border management compliant with the law and human rights principles The fourth and last general goal is to ensure that border management measures remain within the area of freedom, security and justice they are supposed to defend. The activities involved must therefore have a legal basis and respect the human rights of those who are subject to control. 3/30 Strategic guidelines The above general goals are substantiated with strategic guidelines, which define the principles for defining individual objectives and the action plan. To a certain extent, the strategic guidelines reflect the association with Schengen policy; in other respects, however, they are an integral part of any administrative activity. As with the general goals, the strategic guidelines are applicable across the board and are not assigned to any specific filter. Strategic guideline 1: Border management makes a key contribution to internal security Taking a comprehensive approach to preventing illegal immigration and associated crossborder crime, border management makes an important contribution to internal security. An integrated border management strategy must always be guided by this core function. Strategic guideline 2: Border management contributes to security within the Schengen Area In joining the Schengen Area, Switzerland became part of a European security architecture. Each Member State’s responsibility within this system extends beyond its own internal security to that of the entire Schengen Area. A successful border management strategy can no longer focus solely on Switzerland’s (internal) borders but must meet the security requirements of the entire Schengen Area. Strategic guideline 3: Border management is based on the EU’s border management strategy and contributes to its design Although a national border management strategy can no longer focus solely on its own national area and must meet the security requirements of the entire Schengen Area, there must a minimum of strategic alignment between the individual national strategies. Such alignment is achieved by basing the national strategy on the EU’s border management strategy, particularly the four-filter model of the Schengen border security model, and Switzerland actively contributes to its continued development. Strategic guideline 4: The border management strategy is aligned with other relevant strategies Safeguarding internal security is a typical cross-cutting issue. The integrated border management strategy should therefore be aligned with other strategies. Where these are known, it should be ensured that the individual objectives and the action plan defined do not conflict with any other related or overlapping strategies. Where conflicts cannot be avoided, these should be disclosed. Strategic guideline 5: The border management agencies have the necessary resources to perform their tasks with efficient use of financial resources The volume of international travel has been growing steadily in recent years. Meanwhile, entry procedures are becoming increasingly complex. This poses a burden on the resources and infrastructure of border management agencies, unable to adapt to such trends, or at least not to the extent that would be necessary. Maximising efficiency of the limited resources available is therefore an important requirement of any border management strategy. 4/30 It should be noted, however, that if border agencies are unable to perform their legal mandate at the required level, despite an efficient and targeted use of resources, additional funding must be allocated in order to ensure a credible border management strategy. Strategic guideline 6: Border management is professional, fast, consistent and appropriate Border management agencies are usually a traveller’s first point of contact with Swiss bureaucracy. As they often form a traveller’s first impressions of Switzerland, they are representative of the country to a certain extent. The agencies involved must therefore perform their tasks in a manner that is professional (well-trained, assured, experienced, accurate), fast (meeting all legal and assured deadlines and without unnecessary delays), consistent (uniform and non-negotiable) and appropriate (proportionate, justifiable and correct approach). Strategic guideline 7: Border management respects human rights principles; it allows access to a fair procedure for those seeking protection from persecution Border management and its associated agencies must ensure the protection of human rights and grant access to a fair procedure for those seeking protection from persecution, allowing them to assert their claim and await clarification of their status. Strategic guideline 8: Border management agencies work closely with each other and with other relevant domestic and foreign agencies and utilise the synergies created The Swiss IBM model regards border management as the outcome of the interaction between various Swiss (cantonal and federal), foreign and other European agencies involved in different phases of the immigration process. Thus, in order to fulfil the general goals, the various agencies and their processes should be integrated in a manner that is as comprehensive, systematic and seamless as possible. At a national level, this concerns the cooperation between those agencies actually involved in border management (i.e. foreign representations, border control and customs agencies, and police forces). Systematic cooperation with other relevant agencies (i.e. immigration, civil registry and social security offices) should also be sought as far as possible. Strategic guideline 9: Border management contributes to the enforcement of removal measures If a border management strategy also includes activities within the territory itself, as in the case of the four-filter system, its focus should not be solely on preventing or detecting illegal immigration and cross-border crime. The entire border management system will be more plausible and acceptable if it also encompasses solutions for consistent enforcement of removal measures. As well as considering how best to stem the flow of illegal immigration and cross-border crime, the border management strategy must also address the issues of enforcing removal measures and contribute to finding appropriate solutions. Strategic guideline 10: Future developments / trends are incorporated into border management A successful strategy should serve as a system of reference for decision-makers. To this end, a strategy must have a certain degree of consistency and take a medium to long-term approach. It should not be geared solely to the status quo, but should also anticipate future trends as far as possible and provide answers to various scenarios. 5/30 Problems / Weaknesses In terms of methodology, the starting point for defining the integrated border management strategy is a situation deemed to be in need of improvement. The strategy is primarily regarded as a means of getting from the current situation to the target optimum situation. This method presupposes that those areas presenting potential for optimisation in practice have been identified and defined. This specifically refers to areas that, despite functioning well (e.g. thanks to the commitment, initiative and/or relationships of those involved), could still be improved with organisational, legal, structural, institutional or other changes and made less dependent on individual players or on chance. This inventory of problems outlining the system’s various weaknesses is therefore merely a consequence of the chosen methodology. It serves to identify areas in need of optimisation and is by no means a general criticism of those involved in border management or their level of professionalism and commitment. Filter 1: Insufficient collection, preparation and/or utilisation of information available on-site Push factors in the countries of origin and transit are the causes and catalysts of illegal immigration. The strategies for implementing illegal immigration and the choice of destination depend on a number of underlying conditions and pull factors. Knowledge of certain factors and strategies is essential for the targeted prevention of illegal immigration. Switzerland has a dense and efficient network of representatives in the main countries of origin and transit of illegal immigration. However, consular staff are already working to capacity with their core functions in visa issuance and other general consular tasks. Also, the staff of representations abroad are constantly seeking the right balance between their work as service providers and complying with the law in issuing visas. Their local integration, whether with the representations of other Schengen States or with domestic agencies, depends largely on the commitment of individual employees. In principle, the commission is supposed to organise consular meetings on site on the topics set out in the Visa Code. In practice, however, consular cooperation depends largely on the commitment of individual states or persons. In addition, following the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, certain new responsibilities have been assigned to the European External Action Service, adding to the complexity of the situation. Some of the representations lack sufficiently trained experts and the corresponding know-how, e.g. in counterfeit detection. FDFA seminars such as “Cooperation in Migration” provide an opportunity to inform the consular staff of representations abroad about a range of aspects concerning illegal immigration and the prevention of people smuggling and human trafficking. This seminar is optional, however, and can be attended by only around a dozen employees each year. In the countries of origin or transit of illegal immigration, Switzerland offers very few or no other services apart from visa issuance. To date (as at August 2011), Switzerland has no Airline Liaison Officers (ALO) to train airlines in document control and has only six immigration attachés. 6 Due to the lack of specialists in illegal immigration in countries of origin and transit, the information available is largely provided by others, such as partner countries or partners in the private sector (e.g. Swiss). Such information and findings are 6 Immigration attachés from the FDFA in Dakar, Abuja and Colombo; immigration attachés from the FOM in Pristina, Ankara and Brussels 6/30 either of a general nature (e.g. reports on the general migration situation) or refer to specific occurrences affecting other partner countries. There is a serious lack of any direct relationship with illegal immigration to Switzerland. Where first-hand information is available and is forwarded by the representations (e.g. within the context of specific applications to the cantonal migration offices or the FOM), the representation’s staff often have the impression that this information is not given sufficient weight. Equally, as the collection, dissemination and utilisation of information on illegal immigration is in need of improvement, this also applies in the case of legal immigration. For example, as a result of inadequacies in the preparation and use of such information, efforts to facilitate the entry of certain categories of persons may be unnecessarily hampered due to a lack of coordination with the border control agencies. In summary, the following problem areas were found: • On-site findings concerning illegal immigration are insufficiently utilised in the day-to-day work of those agencies operating in the other filter areas. • Potential for improvement regarding know-how and specialist staff in the representations abroad • Most information comes from external sources (other partner countries or private-sector companies) Individuals who do not meet the entry requirements and whose transportation should have been prevented are still reaching the external border Switzerland has no discernible upstream strategy in the prevention of illegal immigration. As a result, the problem of illegal immigration still occurs at Switzerland’s Schengen external border. This may take the form of persons who do not require a visa but are travelling on a forged travel document or persons who do require a visa and have fraudulently obtained a visa by producing false information or documents. Filter 2: Switzerland’s limited institutional integration in the EU Switzerland’s limited institutional integration in the EU is seen as an overriding aspect in the formulation and implementation of national border management. While the classic core elements of border management (visa and border control procedures) have been fully assumed by Switzerland as a part of the Schengen acquis, Switzerland’s inclusion in the European security architecture (e.g. Prüm, PNR Initiative) is outside of the Schengen context. It should also be mentioned that Switzerland, as a non-EU Member State, is not involved or only to a limited extent in certain joint systems or institutions of EU Member States (e.g. discussions on voting rights regarding Frontex and the IT agency) and therefore does not benefit from the associated synergies. Insufficient cooperation and information exchange on issues of strategic policy Cooperation in strategic policy between the Schengen Member States and other important western partner countries (e.g. UK, Canada, US) is primarily restricted to cooperation on committees and thus highly segmented in terms of participation. Apart from Schengenspecific boards and committees, there are other committees and organisational forms dealing to some extent with issues of international travel, air travel, border control and the 7/30 use of modern technology. 7 The national agencies’ participation is thus spread over a variety of different committees on which the administration at a federal and also a cantonal level is represented for various purposes and interests. For the most part, participants define their own positions and the aims they wish to fulfil through such participation. Apart from certain exceptions (e.g. National Facilitation Committee under the aegis of the Federal Office of Civil Aviation, coordination role of the IO and the FOJ in Schengen-related matters), issues concerning immigration are not prepared on an inter-agency basis. Also, too little significance is attached to follow-up, the flow of information and a long-term assessment of the value of participating in such committees in the area of illegal immigration and border management. Insufficient networking at an operational level At the operational level too, there is a lack of systematic or at least regular exchange between the Swiss and foreign border control agencies. The contacts in existence are spontaneous, personal and not formalised. Exceptions include the use of a German liaison officer from the federal police with the Border Guard as well as the two Cooperation Centres for Police and Customs (CCPD) in Geneva and Chiasso, focusing on classic cross-border police cooperation (under the aegis of the Federal Office of Police) and not the prevention of illegal immigration. Restrictive regional and language features also need to be taken into consideration, as these may specifically facilitate or even hamper cross-border contact. For example, the contacts that Zurich airport police have with airports in Germany are rarely used by Geneva. The use of regional police conferences is also restricted to certain regions and language areas. On the other hand, such cultural, political or language specificities may mean that information and findings at a tactical and operational level are conveyed to other federal or cantonal offices only sporadically or in specific cases. It should also be noted that, where contacts do exist, they may not be fully exploited due to the fact that the foreign partner agencies are not sufficiently familiar with the structure and functioning of Swiss agencies. Filter 3: Different standards in certain areas of border control In principle, responsibility for the control of persons at the border lies with the canton, although this task may also be delegated to the Border Guard. As a consequence, three different agencies are responsible for the three major Schengen external borders (Zurich, Geneva and Basel airports). Although border control is conducted in accordance with the formal requirements of Schengen law and is therefore uniform, the division of responsibilities in certain areas results in differences in practice and, to a certain extent, in terms of quality. In particular, differences exist with regard to training, the equipment available to control agencies and the arrangements for discretionary powers in border control. 7 For example, IATA CAWG (International Air Transport Association - Control Agencies Working Group), various task forces and committees of the ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organisation, e.g. the Technical Advisory Group [TAG], the New Technologies Working Group [NTWG], the Implementation and Capacity Building Working Group [ICBWG] and the Public Key Directory [PKD]), as well as other committees such as IGC (Intergovernmental Consultations on migration, asylum and refugees) and ICMPD (International Centre for Migration Policy Development) 8/30 Insufficient networking among the agencies responsible for border control with regard to information exchange and cooperation The different agencies are insufficiently networked and, unless the impetus comes from outside, make little effort to formulate a joint set of best practices or to exchange information among each other. The latter is mainly done informally and at the initiative of individuals. A regular or even systematic exchange of strategic and operational findings exists only in certain sub-areas (such as forged documents) or through the Border Guard’s liaison office with the Federal Office for Migration and the Federal Office of Police (fedpol). Growing computerisation of border control raises new challenges in the control of persons The control of persons at the border is increasingly supported by technical tools. Travel documents are already systematically scanned at border crossing points, and the personal details of certain travellers, depending on their status, are matched against various databases (SIS, RIPOL, ZEMIS). The level of computerisation will increase further with the introduction of the Visa Information System (VIS), for biometric visas, and the automatic border control currently in pilot operation. This trend will continue into the foreseeable future with two more IT systems, the Entry/Exit system and the Registered Traveller Programme. There is a danger with such developments of focusing solely on the technical (digital) factors to the detriment of “soft” factors, such as a contradictory behaviour or appearance or other unusual profiles. The staff are not sufficiently aware of such issues and their training does not cover this point satisfactorily. The break-down of responsibilities also entails a certain degree of systemic inefficiency, with very few synergies actually recognised and utilised (e.g. procurement/development of technical devices). Conflict of interests between border police and the economy In addition, the border control agencies face a systemic conflict of interests: on the one hand, they are supposed to work towards preventing illegal immigration; on the other hand, however, they are also supposed to facilitate legitimate entry. Airport operators and airlines, in particular, have a huge interest in the latter point and use international airport rankings to put pressure on border control agencies; this may have a dilutive effect on the quality of controls. The issue is exacerbated by the absence of any legal basis for the use of infrastructure at airports, which could be used to determine how much space airport operators must make available to the control agencies and at which price. This often results in lengthy and difficult negotiations with the airport operator, seeking to address the conflict between security concerns and commercial interests. Border control systems are circumvented by persons who conceal their identity or who abuse the asylum process to prevent immediate removal Certain persons manage to avoid or circumvent the border control system by concealing their identity and itinerary at the border. This makes it impossible to assign the person in question to a particular nationality or even airline. Also, certain persons fraudulently file an asylum application so as to evade immediate removal. Such categories of persons are not or only marginally affected by the measures available in the control system. 9/30 Filter 4: The problem areas concerning this filter are characterised by the high fragmentation of responsibilities. Insufficient information exchange and insufficient networking Successful enforcement requires comprehensive and systematic cooperation between immigration, civil registry, social security and prosecution offices at all three levels (intracantonal, inter-cantonal and between the Confederation and cantons), which does not exist today to a satisfactory degree. This is because the required legal basis is not complete and/or because current practice does not fully utilise the available possibilities. This adds to the existing pull factors for choosing Switzerland as a destination for illegal immigration (e.g. strong economy, open society, large foreign diasporas). For example, there is no systematic exchange of data between civil registry offices (in the case of marriages or births) and the immigration agencies, or in the naturalisation process between the various agencies involved. With each specialist office focusing on its own core business (civil registration, naturalisation), there is no generally applicable requirement to obtain and assess all basic documents applicable to the case in question. This can result in relevant procedures and information (illegal entry, illegal residence, identity theft) not being adequately taken into account, if at all. 8 There is no exchange of data between the social security system (AHV/AVS) and the central register of foreigners (ZEMIS) for the detection of unreported employment, despite the fact that illegal immigration is not an end in itself and regularly occurs in conjunction with economic objectives. There is just as little exchange of information on cases of illegal residence, e.g. when persons cross the external border, in the investigation of unreported employment. On the whole, therefore, various systemic opportunities to identify and prevent illegal immigration are not utilised, whether consciously or not. Consequently, there is very little reliable information on the number of people living illegally in Switzerland. Due to the lack of information exchange, it is not possible to conduct a currentstate analysis on the topic of illegal immigration. This would be necessary, however, for the planning and implementation of operational measures or for a debate on policy strategy that also takes legislative consequences into account. The following problem areas have been identified: • Lack of, inadequate or unsystematic alignment / networking of the various agencies’ processes • Systemic potential for identifying and preventing illegal immigration is not or is not systematically utilised • Insufficient awareness of the forms and range of illegal immigration within the territory due to insufficient information exchange 8 Positive examples of improved cooperation in data exchange are the amendments, in force since 1 January 2011, to the Federal Act on the Information System on Asylum and Foreign Nationals (AFISA) and the Civil Partnership Act. These changes require foreign-national fiancé(e)s preparing a wedding to provide proof of legal residence in Switzerland. Also, the civil registry offices have extended access to ZEMIS, the central immigration information system, and are obliged to notify the relevant agency of any such fiancé(e)s who cannot provide proof of legal residence. These modifications also apply in the case of registered partnerships. 10/30 Uneven distribution of the enforcement burden sets false incentives The given allocation of responsibilities is still based on regional (i.e. cantonal) responsibility and, as such, conflicts to a certain extent with attempts to prevent illegal immigration in increasingly larger structures, i.e. on a multilateral basis. The current allocation of responsibilities thus encourages a primarily regional approach to preventing illegal immigration, making it harder to define a procedure that addresses both national as well as Schengen-wide interests. There is very little incentive to promote a pan-regional (i.e. inter-cantonal or even national) approach to preventing the phenomenon, in the manner of the cost compensation between cantons. Also, a canton that is particularly meticulous and thorough in enforcement is not rewarded for its efforts but, instead, is actually burdened more, e.g. by having to invest in additional enforcement infrastructure (such as detention centres). This creates an incentive to transfer responsibility to another agency or even not to handle individual cases at all in the hope that they “sort themselves out” as the illegal immigrant continues on to another canton or another country. Such incentives are particularly strong in cantons facing disproportionately high enforcement costs on account of their geographical proximity to an internal or external border. In particular, the following problem areas have been identified: • Too many case numbers (well above a critical mass) results in quality problems; too few case numbers (significantly below a critical mass) results in insufficient awareness and inefficient parallel structures, which may also lead to quality problems. • Promotion of a regional rather than national / Schengen-wide approach and procedure • Thorough efforts in enforcement are “rewarded” with additional burdens • Promotion of an attitude of transferring responsibility to other agencies • Allowing illegal immigrants to continue their journey is seen as a problem-solving option Discrepancies in practice and weaknesses in the identification of forgeries, investigation, prosecution and enforcement (use of force/removal) Clear discrepancies exist between the cantons with regard to the detection, investigation and prosecution of immigration-relation offences, the enforcement of removal measures and the arrangements for use of force. Such discrepancies are not necessarily negative; however, they do have adverse consequences if they prevent the development of best practices supported and observed by all agencies or lead to circumstances that conflict with the overriding, i.e. national interests or the interests of the Schengen community. For example, cases are regularly found where Swiss residence permits are fraudulently obtained with forged travel documents. Forged passports from EU Member States are primarily used in such cases although those from other countries are also sometimes used. The holders thus appear to have a legal status in Switzerland even though their identity is not clear. This results from a lack of awareness and, to a certain extent, know-how among the agencies issuing residence permits. In the combat against people smuggling, there are weaknesses in arresting and processing smugglers in the border areas. If people smugglers lower down in the hierarchy are stopped at border crossing points by the BG, the cases are processed within the context of the delegated competencies and thus in a simplified procedure. The suspects are questioned on their act, reported and released, and judgments in absentia are pronounced with minor punishments. Information on organised networks (evaluation of mobile phones, satellite 11/30 navigation systems, perpetrators’ relationships, etc.) is generally not gathered and evaluated when individual people smugglers are intercepted at the border or forwarded to the criminal investigation department of the relevant cantonal police for further investigation of the organised groups behind them. The cantons have little interest in following up on and investigating such cases and have little specialised investigative capacities, i.e. expertise and resources, to consistently pursue any such leads. The criminal prosecution of people smugglers in Switzerland is thus restricted to the sentencing of perpetrators solely for the facilitation of illegal entry in individual cases; findings from the apprehension of smugglers at the border are not used against the underlying networks running international peoplesmuggling operations. Also, for example, the legislative leeway available to the enforcement agencies is sometimes used to offset the impact of having insufficient resources (especially detention places). This creates a certain reciprocation between the official policy, the resources available and local enforcement practices, which cannot be simply described as cause and effect. Finally, it should be noted that enforcement in immigration law sometimes fails or is at least hampered as a result of unresolved inconsistencies in policy. One example of this is the fact that some migrants living and working illegally in Switzerland are legally (and voluntarily) paying social security contributions. Overall, the following problem areas have been identified: • The fragmentation of responsibilities and a generous power of discretion among the enforcement agencies hamper the establishment and implementation of national “best practices” in the investigation, prosecution and enforcement of removal measures. • The actual practice in investigation, prosecution and enforcement is determined by various criteria, some of which are extraneous (e.g. policy orientation, as well as the availability of specific know-how and enforcement resources). • Unresolved policy inconsistencies hamper enforcement. Enforcement is circumvented by individuals who evade immediate removal by filing futile asylum applications Certain categories of asylum seekers file their applications only after they have been intercepted inside the territory and are consequently threatened with removal. In such cases, the asylum procedure is frequently abused to secure a temporary right to stay and to escape the threat of immediate removal. General / filter-independent problem areas: Information and analysis weaknesses Information and analysis weaknesses can occur with all filters. Specifically: The representations abroad (Filter 1) often lack clear instructions regarding the information needs of the various agencies involved in border management. Although a standard reporting protocol has been introduced for the representations, there is not yet any substantial improvement in exchange. Another problem is the fact that the representations often receive no feedback on the information furnished. There is thus no standardised, circular flow of information. In principle, the agencies working in border control (Filter 3) collect and analyse by themselves, and thus on a decentralised basis, the data needed for assessing their situation. However, the most important data is collected by the FOM monthly and subsequently aggregated and made available to the border control agencies and the representations as 12/30 part of an integral survey of the external border. Every three months, the FOM interprets the data collected in this survey and places it in a wider context. As an actual analysis of this data cannot be based solely on static fundamentals but also requires profound operational findings, a professional, systematic and national analysis is now carried out. This weakness is even more evident in the findings on the various forms of illegal immigration and/or cross-border crime within the territory: given that the responsibilities are so highly fragmented (26 cantons and the BG), there are no reliable statistics on interceptions within the territory. It is not even possible to make extrapolations based on the BG’s information (which is generally available), due to the different responsibilities within the individual cantons. Where cantonal statistics do exist, it is not possible to filter out those cases that the BG already intercepted, recorded in the statistics and subsequently forwarded to the cantonal agencies, leading to distortions in the statistics. Furthermore, a horizontal audit of the statistics does not provide any conclusions, as the extent of underlying controls differs and cannot be evaluated. Even in the area of operational findings, which would be crucial for an analysis, the overall structures are not available. This is evident, for example, in the fact that very few findings from administrative or criminal investigations of offences in immigration law are included in and thereby affect the situation analysis (the only exceptions are reports on forgery methods and occasionally on special procedures, which are exchanged directly between the agencies operating in Filter 3). An analysis and presentation of the current situation in people smuggling and cross-border crime is carried out within the Federal Office of Police, however. Overall, therefore, it can be said that each office focuses on its own needs and carries out its own analysis – if at all – without taking an integral approach. There is therefore a need for comprehensive management of the relevant information from the areas of illegal immigration and cross-border crime as well as a superordinate, integral and national analysis of this information. In summary, the following problem areas were found: • There is no comprehensive management of the relevant information from the areas of Illegal immigration and cross-border crime. • There is no superordinate, integral, national analysis of the relevant information from the areas of illegal immigration and cross-border crime. • Where analysis results do exist, these are not sufficiently used at the operational level. Insufficient exchange between the strategic policy and operational levels In general, the national debate on immigration is strongly oriented to current developments and, in particular, their impact on the area of asylum. It is therefore quite restrictive and tends to focus on a single topic. Meanwhile, illegal immigration or the concepts and strategies to prevent it are often left out of the discussion. Where such concepts do exist, there are certain weaknesses in the exchange between the strategic policy and operational levels. Operational information is not used in an appropriate form in the area of strategic policy; similarly, the internationally formulated strategic orientation – where this exists – is not sufficiently used in operational planning and implementation. This raises the risk of operational measures becoming an end in themselves rather than part of an overall strategy, or of strategic orientations being based more on opportunities than a situation analysis that includes the partners involved. This lack of exchange results in unrealistic expectations of the strategic requirements or the possibilities at operational level. 13/30 Finally, there is no or insufficient association between Switzerland’s cooperation and aid given to the countries of origin and transit of illegal migrants and measures against people smuggling. For example, bilateral cooperation and ancillary activities with third countries are being expanded without making such development contingent upon national measures against people smuggling. Thus, apart from international cooperation in crime prevention, pressure should also be put on the countries of origin and transit of illegal immigrants to take political measures to combat people smuggling more intensively. In summary, the following problem areas were found: • With regard to strategic policy, the topic of illegal immigration often remains in the shadow of asylum discussions. • The strategic policy is not sufficiently based on experiences at an operational level. • The strategic orientation in preventing illegal immigration is not used in operational planning and implementation of border management activities. • There is no or insufficient association between Switzerland’s aid to the countries of origin and transit of illegal migrants and the measures against people smuggling. Insufficient prevention of people smuggling In many cases, illegal immigration is associated with illegal border crossing. Depending on the route and distance between the countries of origin and destination, it may be necessary to cross several borders, avoid numerous controls and deceive any number of border control officers. This is difficult to acheive without the assistance of others more familiar with the place and/or procedures. Well-organised, international smuggler networks operating in this lucrative business form the basis of illegal immigration. Therefore, the successful prevention of illegal immigration cannot focus solely on the detection and removal of illegal immigrants. At the same time, efforts must be made to identify and dismantle the smuggling structures that make illegal immigration possible in the first place. This is not yet being done to a satisfactory extent. There is no systematic follow-up to signs of people smuggling. There is no centralised gathering and evaluation of such information, which would be necessary to obtain an overall picture of these networks, which, by definition, operate across borders. The following facts shape the current situation in the prevention of people smuggling: • As a rule, such criminal gangs do not meet the criteria for organised crime in accordance with Art. 260ter of the Federal Criminal Code, which means that prosecution falls under the cantons’ authority. • The offence is contained in Art. 116 and in Art. 118 of the Foreign Nationals Act and thus falls under the supplementary penal provisions and not the Criminal Code. • If intelligence on people smuggling is sent to Switzerland within the context of requests for mutual legal assistance or international police cooperation, these generally concern several cantons at the same time. This creates the following problems: • In the cantons it is often not the criminal investigation departments of the police that deal with reports on people smuggling but members of the security police or the administrative agencies for immigration. Consequently, the investigative powers of the criminal police are not utilised, while the prosecuting agencies’ expertise in this crime form is limited. The prevention of people smuggling is not a focal point of criminal investigations in any canton and, as a result, no resources are allocated to this area. 14/30 • When intelligence is received from abroad, the first step often carried out in practice is to determine which canton is responsible for the investigations. By the time this question has been resolved, police operations have already taken place abroad. As a rule, the clarifications in Switzerland tend to end after replying to the questions from abroad. Exchanges between the criminal police and coordination are primarily conducted by the central office for human trafficking/people smuggling within the Federal Criminal Police and, if necessary, following surveys of the cantonal police forces involved. • Some of the cantons regard people smuggling networks as organised crime and, because of the strong inter-cantonal and international element, regard prosecution as being under federal authority, thereby ensuring a greater chance of success. Therefore, when intelligence does appear, there is very little interest in further clarifications. However, the federal prosecution agencies do not conduct any investigations, as they do not regard people smuggling as organised crime within the meaning of Art. 260ter. • When smugglers are apprehended – by the control agencies at the external and internal borders – the suspects are frequently released after questioning. If a judgement is made, it is usually in absentia and thus has no general preventative effect (cf. explanations of Filter 4 on page 12). Indications of people smuggling are not systematically followed up in the cantons. Only the Federal Criminal Police acts as a central agency. In general, it can be said that any investigative attempts that could possibly enable people smuggling networks to be targeted are rarely followed up with the required consistency. As a result, the only means of combating people smuggling in Switzerland is by routinely arresting lower-level perpetrators intercepted at the border. There are no criminal investigations in this area or proceedings opened with offers of cooperation with other countries against the criminal gangs operating in the background. Only in certain cases has it been possible to arrest the people-smuggling masterminds living in Switzerland, based on mutual assistance and the cooperation of the Federal Criminal Police, and deliver these to the relevant agencies in the applicant countries. This results in the following specific problems: • Indications of people smuggling are not gathered and evaluated with the required consistency. • Where such indications exist, the criminal prosecution and punishment of the perpetrators often turns out to be insufficient. 15/30 Individual objectives After adjustment of the problem inventory, and with reference to the general goals as well as the strategic guidelines, a set of individual objectives can now be formulated, with each problem area generating several individual objectives (for example, see the detailed view for Filter 3). It was decided at this stage not yet to assess the individual objectives for political acceptance or to omit politically controversial objectives from the list. It will be left up to the relevant agencies in each case to decide on which of the individual objectives should ultimately be pursued. Filter F1 Problem area Objective Comment / explanation Instruments already initiated Insufficient Staff at Swiss representations abroad • The awareness programmes should be carried out • Ad hoc training for transferable FDFA employees collection, are aware of the specific migratory with specific reference to the shortage of resources preparation and/or phenomena in relation to illegal (migratory pressure is not the same at all locations, • Pre-assignment meetings with ambassadors and utilisation of immigration and people smuggling at e.g. Abuja vs. Dubai) information their location. available on-site Loss of knowledge through consular staff rotation. Possible solution: A country-specific training course could be developed for this group of people. An initial step in this direction would be to draw up a list of the relevant locations. visa managers • Country files for the Border division • FDFA seminar on “Cooperation in migration” for consular staff So-called networking visits are made occasionally, when a member of consular staff meets with an FOM representative to be briefed before taking up a new position. However, these visits are apparently based on the consular officer’s initiative rather than an obligation. Regional consular meetings are organised quarterly by the FDFA, with the participation of the FOM and the cantons. 16/30 Filter Problem area Objective Comment / explanation Instruments already initiated The consular representations have • • Changing situations call for flexibility in terms of sufficient qualified staff with regard to both the number and qualifications of the staff the number of visa applications to be working at the representations abroad. processed and the migratory pressure Basic and further training of the visa staff in the FOM • Assistance for the representations abroad from the BG staff (agreement terminates at the end of this at their specific location. year) • The FDFA intends to introduce a benchmarking system for the allocation of consular staff. The system will take account of all the necessary parameters, integrating the elements of the IBM strategy. Swiss representations draw on their • The Schengen cooperation (laid down in legal terms network of on-site contacts within the in Art. 48 of the Visa Code) is an important context of local Schengen instrument for guaranteeing a harmonised visa cooperation to learn more about the police and practice among Schengen States. phenomena of illegal immigration and people smuggling and to circulate their own findings on these subjects. • Local Schengen cooperation on site differs greatly, depending on the commitment of individuals. • Attempt by the Border division to establish a uniform reporting system. International examples: • EU ILO Network • ICMPD: MTM-iMap Informal ILO Network (Italy, Netherlands, UK in Egypt, Ghana, Lebanon, Kenya, Nigeria, Syria). This project is currently being expanded. 17/30 Filter Problem area Objective Comment / explanation Instruments already initiated A circular flow of information exists • It has been confirmed that, although much • Integrated situation analysis? between border management information is available, this is not sufficiently agencies and Swiss representations evaluated and combined in a central immigration • Distribution of foreign immigration studies by the abroad and is compiled in a central analysis. This situation results in an information immigration analysis. overflow. Moreover, due to the lack of feedback, the Management cockpit of the integrated situation analysis informing office cannot assess the relevance of the at the external border Border division (e.g. GASIM)? documents sent. Possible solutions: • Definition of the individual agencies’ information needs. • Set up a national information office to gather, prepare and forward the information to specific agencies or at least make it available. • Feedback (e.g. on reports and indications from consular staff) could have a positive impact at an individual level. The objectives of tourism promotion, Real-life example: Swiss Tourism is running a campaign business location marketing, etc. are in China and thus expects an increase in visa aligned with those of visa agencies applications, although the FDFA has not allocated any and border control agencies. additional funds at the same time. Improved processing and coordination of information is crucial. • Workshop with the FOM, FDFA and Swiss Tourism in August 2011 • Establishment of a permanent committee to address such issues • In July / August 2011, the FDFA took certain specific measures in the representations concerned (e.g. examination of outsourcing solutions). 18/30 Filter F1 Problem area Objective Comment / explanation Instruments already initiated Individuals who do The number of people who reach the • There is no network of Airline Liaison Officers • ALO pilot project not meet the entry external border despite not fulfilling (ALO), which would be a central element of the requirements and the entry requirements is reduced. upstream prevention strategy. • Task force "ALO assignment agreement" Greater cooperation and information Airlines, tour operators whose transportation should have been prevented are still exchange between public agencies and the private sector reaching the external border 19/30 Filter Problem area Objective Comment / explanation Instruments already initiated F2 Switzerland’s Switzerland intensifies its cooperation Lack of institutional involvement in some cases, e.g. in Participation in Eurostat limited institutional with EU Member States in the theory, Switzerland has a voting right in certain Frontex integration in the development of a European security decisions although it has never actually had the EU architecture. opportunity to exercise this. Switzerland has a documented position regarding the further development of a national and European security architecture. Insufficient Participation in international The extent to which such coordination can take place cooperation and committees regarding the prevention within the context of international migration cooperation information of illegal immigration is prepared on should be examined. exchange on issues an interagency basis. of strategic policy The results of participation in • It has been confirmed that, although much committees on migratory issues are information is available, this is not sufficiently forwarded to all federal offices evaluated and combined in a central immigration involved. analysis. This situation results in an information overflow. Moreover, due to the lack of feedback, the informing office cannot assess the relevance of the documents sent. Possible solutions: Definition of the individual agencies’ information needs. Set up a national information office to gather, prepare and forward the information to specific agencies or at least make it available. 20/30 Filter Problem area Objective Comment / explanation Instruments already initiated A regular and systematic flow of • IDAG Schengen information exists between the federal • IDAG FRONTEX offices and the cantons regarding the immigration-related topics discussed on the various committees. Insufficient Formalised contact exists between networking at an Swiss and foreign border control operational level agencies. • Currently done informally and occasionally only. FCA access to VIS data Deployment of a German federal police liaison office within the BG. Swiss border control agencies The central office of the Federal Criminal Police ensures regularly and systematically exchange the international exchange of information in criminal findings with foreign border control investigations and represents Switzerland on agencies on the prevention of illegal international expert committees and task forces. immigration and people smuggling. National police conferences regularly See details on the exchange between border control The central office of the Federal Criminal Police ensures exchange findings with other police agencies. the international exchange of information in criminal conferences, particularly those from investigations and represents Switzerland on neighbouring countries, on the international expert committees and task forces. prevention of illegal immigration and people smuggling. 21/30 Filter F3 Problem area Objective Comment / explanation Instruments already initiated Different standards The border control agencies follow Suggestion: Directives on border control in certain areas of uniform best practices. • Staff training follows the same Suggestions: standards and is completed with a set • border control of exams with harmonised content. Peer-to-peer evaluations e-learning tool e-learning exam, based on the e-learning tool of the BG and Zurich cantonal police, used for the introduction of Schengen • Creation of an optional module on border control at the Swiss Police Institute SPI Core elements of the training / exam • Elements of the common core curriculum (CCC) for border protection officers • Prevention of people smuggling • Language skills The border control agencies have the same or at least equivalent technical equipment. 22/30 Filter Problem area Objective Comment / explanation Insufficient The border control agencies regularly Notes: networking among exchange operational and strategic the agencies findings. • Caution should be observed in creating additional new committees (expenses / income) responsible for • border control and Most problems are regional (other threats based on with regard to different destinations / airlines, etc.). no real need information for operational exchange exchange as well Instruments already initiated Suggestions: as cooperation. • Introduction of “Border control experience days”, similar to “SIS experience days” • Development of “modi-operandi report form”, like the faux-doc alert reports The border control agencies establish Suggestion: a joint permanent committee on the • coordination of IT and infrastructure Creation of an expert committee to develop standards, carry out joint evaluations and ensure projects in the field of border control. compatibility of the systems. Official internships or exchange programmes are promoted between the border control agencies. Growing Despite computerisation, the staff are “ASPECTS” project with the Zurich cantonal police for computerisation of aware of the need to also consider training on soft factors border control “soft” factors, such as inconsistencies raises new in behaviour and appearance or challenges in the unusual profiles. control of persons Synergies are sought and harvested Suggestion: in the technical development and • procurement of new equipment. Creation of an expert committee to develop standards, carry out joint evaluations and ensure compatibility of the systems. 23/30 Filter Problem area Objective Comment / explanation Conflict between Legislation is in place that requires Notes: border police and airport operators to provide border economic interests control agencies with the infrastructure needed for enforcing Instruments already initiated In setting up the basics: Strive to achieve the same rules as in the Customs Act border control and removal measures and which specifies the extent to which airport operators have to contribute to border control costs. F3 Border control Measures are intensified to identify Pre-arrival document review on the plane with the use of systems are persons who conceal their nationality FAREC (Face Recognition) by the Zurich cantonal police circumvented by and/or the airline they used in border at Zurich airport persons who checks. conceal their identity or who abuse the asylum process to evade immediate removal 24/30 Filter F4 Problem area Objective Insufficient All of the agencies involved in the information enforcement process cooperate exchange and extensively and systematically and insufficient are subject to a reporting obligation networking where there are any indications of Comment / explanation Instruments already initiated illegal immigration or people smuggling. Systemic potential for identifying and preventing illegal immigration and people smuggling is systematically utilised. Personal details are systematically matched against the relevant databases on the basis of the underlying legislation and technical facilities required. Uneven distribution Substantial increase in the likelihood The following action areas are instrumental in this of enforcement of detection within the entire territory. respect: burden sets false • incentives Adoption of widespread location-specific control and surveillance measures • Increased sense of security among the population, particularly in border areas • Guarantee of the required information exchange • Regular performance of a risk analysis • Establishment of concrete search criteria The decisive and consistent prevention of illegal immigration is promoted by way of incentives. 25/30 Filter Problem area Objective Comment / explanation Instruments already initiated Cost compensation instruments exist in the prevention of illegal immigration. Supra-cantonal centres of expertise exist for the prevention of illegal immigration, people smuggling and the associated and/or subsequent offences. Discrepancies in Enforcement practices are aligned practice and with long-term national interests and weaknesses in the not short-term policy guidelines. identification of forgeries, investigation, prosecution and enforcement (use of force/removal) Overlapping in enforcement is minimised; any remaining areas of redundancy do not hinder enforcement. The agencies responsible for enforcing removal measures follow uniform best practices. Agencies that issue residence permits systematically check travel documents for forgeries and have the necessary know-how in this respect. Training of investigative agencies is Development of corresponding training modules at the promoted on the subject of preventing Swiss Police Institute SPI, analogous to the existing people smuggling. modules in human trafficking. 26/30 Filter Problem area Objective Enforcement is Fewer clearly futile asylum circumvented by applications are filed. individuals who evade immediate removal by filing Comment / explanation Instruments already initiated Clearly futile asylum procedures are rejected at an earlier stage. futile asylum The filing of multiple futile asylum applications applications has consequences for the individual concerned. 27/30 Filter All Problem area Objective Information and Results of studies flow back along analysis official channels to the operational weaknesses level (circular flow of information). Comment / explanation Instruments already initiated National statistics exist on the apprehension of illegal persons and people smugglers within the territory. All relevant information related to illegal immigration and cross-border crime is analysed at a superordinate, integral and national level (centre of expertise). A platform accessible to all involved agencies exists for the purpose of circulating findings in the prevention of illegal immigration. Insufficient Operational findings/outcomes form exchange between the starting point and benchmark for the strategic policy the strategic orientation with respect and operational to third countries and countries of levels origin. There is a regular exchange of information between the levels of strategic policy and operations. Issues regarding illegal immigration and people smuggling are given higher priority in immigration policy. 28/30 Filter Problem area Objective Comment / explanation Instruments already initiated Switzerland’s assistance to the countries of origin and transit of illegal immigrants is contingent upon their adoption of measures against people smuggling. Insufficient Consistency in the gathering and prevention of evaluation of information on people people smuggling smuggling in all four filters. Consistency in the prosecution and punishment of people smuggling. The action plan forms the link between the problem areas and the corresponding individual objectives. 29/30 Expandability The proposed model allows for the development and documentation of strategies to counteract the existing weaknesses. However, it also allows for newly identified weaknesses to be easily integrated into the system. With its overall goals and strategic guidelines, the system also guarantees the consistency required in addressing new weaknesses. 30/30
© Copyright 2024 Paperzz