People’s more or destiny: Blocher’s slit -eared half -truth

The old Federal Council claims that the Federal Office of Justice had once spoken out in connection with EU contracts for the state. Blocher flunkers that the beams bend, as a look at the documents at that time shows.

It is currently the most controversial question in Bundesbern: Is the referendum in the vote on bilateral III, as the Federal Office of Justice (BJ) records it and the Federal Council suggests? Or does the majority of the cantons also have to agree to how the SVP demands?

In the slaughtered frame, Christoph Blocher recently got into an uncomfortable situation: the pro -European camp made it a key witness for a simple popular. As a SVP Federal Council and Minister of Justice, he declared in 2004 to the Schengen/Dublin contracts that there was no mandatory referendum for state contracts. At least this is not clear in the Schengen/Dublin case.

On the last Friday, on “Teleblocher”, the SVP-Doyen took a counter-strike-with a veritable revelation: “The Federal Office of Justice said at the time that the agreement of Schengen/Dublin is required for a mandatory referendum.» He applied for this in the Federal Council, but he chose the optional referendum. And as a member of the collegial government, he had to represent that.

Same question, different answer

The SVP-related “Weltwoche” made a story under the title: “A Federal Office of Justice, two opinions”: At Schengen/Dublin, the office under Blocher had argued for the mandatory referendum. Well, under the SP Federal Councilor Beat Jans, the new EU contracts come to the opposite conclusion in the new EU contracts.

Blocher’s statements and its media distribution again called the BJ on the scene on Thursday. A legal opinion dated June 1, 2004 made online: « There is no sufficient constitutional basis that justifies to assume the contracts of Schengen/Dublin to the mandatory referendum, » it says.

So exactly the opposite of what Blocher claims today. BLOSS: How does the old Federal Council get his statement?

The answer provides another document by the Federal Office for Justice: A “Assessment” of June 4, 2004. It says: « According to your mandate, we will send you the draft for a co -report in which we suggest that the agreement of Schengen/Dublin will provide you with the mandatory referendum. »

The co -report itself is still under the Federal Council document around 10 years of confidentiality. Nevertheless, it is clear: Blocher is right – there is a paper of the BJ that demands the mandatory referendum for Schengen/Dublin. It was written on his express command as head of department – because the actual report of his legal experts did not fit into the stuff.