“IntegratedBorderManagement” Action Plan...BMS Biometric Matching System (subsystem of →VIS;...
Transcript of “IntegratedBorderManagement” Action Plan...BMS Biometric Matching System (subsystem of →VIS;...
“Integrated Border Management”Action Plan
2014–2017
Imprint
Photo creditsFDFA/Directorate for Corporate Resources, Bulletin editorial staff: cover pageKeystone: cover page
Published by: Federal Office for Migration (FOM),Quellenweg 6, CH-3003 Bern-Wabern
Editing andconcept: FOM, Entry Division and Executive Staff Office for Information and CommunicationRealisation: www.casalini.chAvailable from: SFBL, Federal publications, CH-3003 Bern,
www.bundespublikationen.admin.chArt. No. 420.103.E© FOM/FDJP November 2014
12.14 110 860345995
Contents
Abbreviations 5
Glossary 7
Foreword 10
0. Management Summary 12
1. Introduction 14
2. The added value of integrated border management 16
3. Scenario 17
3.1 Facts and figures 173.1.1 Travel movements across the external and internal border 173.1.2 Illegal immigration 173.1.3 Asylum 203.1.4 Return 203.1.5 Cross-border crime 21
3.2 Legal aspects 223.3 Definition of responsibilities 233.4 Scope and interfaces 23
4. Switzerland’s IBM strategy 25
4.1 General goals 254.2 Strategic guidelines 264.3 Problem areas 264.4 Individual objectives 264.5 Sustainability 27
5. Action plan 28
5.1 Introduction 285.2 “Third Countries” subproject 29
5.2.1 Overview 295.2.2 Measures 305.2.3 Findings 325.2.4 Financial impacts 335.2.5 Summary 33
5.3 “International Cooperation” subproject 345.3.1 Overview 345.3.2 Measures 355.3.3 Findings 385.3.4 Financial impacts 395.3.5 Summary 39
4
5.4 “Border” subproject 405.4.1 Overview 405.4.2 Measures 415.4.3 Findings 455.4.4 Financial impacts 455.4.5 Summary 46
5.5 “Internal” subproject 475.5.1 Overview 475.5.2 Measures 485.5.3 Findings 515.5.4 Financial impacts 525.5.5 Summary 52
5.6 “General” subproject 535.6.1 Overview 535.6.2 Measures 545.6.3 Findings 605.6.4 Financial impacts 615.6.5 Summary 61
6. Implementation of the measures 62
6.1 Finance 626.2 Schedule 636.3 Monitoring 656.4 Framework agreement 65
7. Overall conclusion 66
ANNEX I: Overview of individual objectives by main topic group 68
ANNEX II: Agencies and organisational units involved in the action plan 71
ANNEX III: Measures by realisation phase 72
5
Abbreviations
ALO Airline Liaison Officer
AP Action plan
API Advance Passenger Information (electronic sys-
tem that sends passenger data to the relevant
border management agencies immediately after
airline check-in)
BE Canton of Bern
BMS Biometric Matching System (subsystem
of → VIS; used to check that the biometric
data being scanned match the data stored
in the database)
CC Web Competency Centre Web of the → GS-FDJP
CD Consular Directorate of the → FDFA
CHF Swiss francs
CISA Convention implementing the Schengen
Agreement of 14 June 1985 between the
Governments of the States of the Benelux
Economic Union, the Federal Republic of Ger-
many and the French Republic on the gradual
abolition of checks at their common borders
CP Cantonal police
CS-VIS Centralised European visa system
DDPS Federal Department of Defence,
Civil Protection and Sport
DEA Directorate for European Affairs
of the → FDFA
DETEC Federal Department of the Environment,
Transport, Energy and Communications
DGC Directorate General of Customs
of the → FDF
DIL Directorate of International Law
of the → FDFA
DPA Directorate of Political Affairs of the → FDFA
DR Directorate for Resources of the → FDFA
EAER Federal Department of Economic Affairs,
Education and Research
EBF External Borders Fund
EFTA European Free Trade Association
EMF Resident services, migration and immigration
police of the City of Bern
EMN European Migration Network
(supports political decision-making processes
in asylum-related and migration-related matters
at a European level)
EU European Union
EVA Electronic visa issuance system
FCA Federal Customs Administration
of the → FDF
FDF Federal Department of Finance
FDFA Federal Department of Foreign Affairs
FDHA Federal Department of Home Affairs
FDJP Federal Department of Justice and Police
FDPIC Federal Data Protection and Information
Commissioner
fedpol Federal Office of the Police of the → FDJP
FEDRO Federal Roads Office of the → DETEC
FIS Federal Intelligence Service of the → DDPS
FNA Foreign Nationals Act ( → SR 142.20)
FOBL Federal Office for Buildings and Logistics
of the → FDF
FOJ Federal Office of Justice of the → FDJP
FOM Federal Office for Migration of the → FDJP
FSO Federal Statistical Office of the → FDHA
GE Canton of Geneva
GR Canton of Graubünden
GS-FDJP General Secretariat of the → FDJP
IBM Integrated Border Management
ICAO International Civil Aviation Organization
ILA Integral survey of the external border
INAD Inadmissible passenger (i.e. a passenger
who does not meet the entry requirements)
IPAS Computerised identity, legitimation and
administrative system of → fedpol
ISA Information system for ID documents
ISC-FDJP IT Service Center of the → FDJP
ISF Internal Security Fund
ISR Information system for issuing Swiss travel
documents and re-entry passes to foreign
nationals
KdK Conference of Cantonal Governments
KKJPD Conference of Cantonal Directors of Justice
and Police Directors
KKPKS Conference of Cantonal Police Commanders
of Switzerland
KSBS Conference of Law Enforcement Authorities
of Switzerland (since 2014 → SSK)
LU Canton of Lucerne
MoU Memorandum of Understanding
PCN Process Control Number (number unambigu-
ously linked to a fingerprint taken within the
context of EURODAC)
RIPOL Recherches informatisées de police (Swiss
Confederation's automatic tracing system)
6
RPC Reception and Processing Centres
of the → FOM
RTP Registered Traveller Programme
(automatic border control system requiring
preregistration)
SAA Schengen Association Agreement:
Agreement of 26 October 2004 between
the Swiss Confederation, the European
Union and the European Community on
the association of that State with the imple-
mentation, application and development
of the Schengen Acquis → SR 0.362.31
SBG Swiss Border Guard of the → FDF
SDC Swiss Agency for Development
and Cooperation of the → FDFA
SECO State Secretariat for Economic Affairs
of the → EAER
SIRENE Supplementary Information Request at
the National Entry (office in every Schengen
Member State for exchanging police
operations information in association
with the → SIS between Member States)
SIS Schengen Information System
SSK Conference of Swiss Prosecution Authorities
(until 2014 → KSBS)
SO Canton of Solothurn
SPI Swiss Police Institute
SR Systematic collection of federal laws
SVZW Swiss Civil Servants’ Association
VIS European Visa Information System
VKM Association of Cantonal Migration Agencies
VS Canton of Valais
VSAA Association of Swiss Labour Market
Authorities
ZEMIS Central Migration Information System
ZH Canton of Zurich
7
Glossary
Action plan: List of specific measures required inorder to attain the objectives defined in the bordermanagement strategy.
ALO: Airline Liaison Officers are document experts.After undergoing needs-based training and coaching,they support the airlines at the check-in and/or pre-boarding stage in verifying document authenticityand detecting misappropriated documents. ALOs aregenerally appointed by the border control agenciesand are deployed outside of the Schengen Area.
ALO Steering Body: Deployments of Swiss ALOs arecoordinated by a Steering Body comprising the FDFA(CD), the FDJP (FOM) and the FDF (SBG). The SteeringBody is appointed by a tripartite agreement.
Border control agency: All federal and cantonalauthorities responsible for the control of personsat Schengen external borders.
Border management: Border management encom-passes all official activities along the migration ortravel process. Apart from the actions and instrumentsfalling directly under border control, this also includesupstream activities in countries of origin or transit(third countries) as well as internal measures down-stream. It also covers actions related to internationalcooperation. This four-tier immigration control model(“four-filter model“) is described in more detail inChapter 4.
Border management agency: All authorities involvedin the border management process, whether at anational or cantonal level (cf. 3.3).
Border management strategy: A catalogue of policyand operational goals as well as strategic guidelinesand other tools for a comprehensive, effective and effi-cient border management system.
Border Steering Committee: A committee compris-ing a high-level representative from the Federal Officeof Police, the Swiss Border Guard, the Federal Officefor Migration, the Zurich Airport Police and the Inter-national Security Police of the Canton of Geneva.It assists the FOM in the planning of border control,in particular, and continually seeks to identify poten-tial improvements to border control.
DUBLIN-OUT Procedure: When an individual seeksasylum in Switzerland, it must first be determinedwhether that person has already lodged an asylumapplication in another Dublin State, in which casethat State is responsible for the asylum claim. If Swit-zerland establishes that another Dublin State bearsresponsibility, that State will be requested to takecharge of the applicant (known as the Out Proce-dure). If the request is accepted, the application inSwitzerland is dismissed. The asylum seeker mustthen leave Switzerland, and the Member Stateresponsible must process the asylum application.
E-document System Platform: Technical subsystemthat can be used to record biometrics data andcheck → e-documents.
E-documents: Documents that comply with ICAODocument 9303 and contain a chip with electronical-ly stored data.
External borders: National borders (airports, landand maritime borders) between a Schengen MemberState and a non-Schengen Member State, i.e. a thirdcountry.
External Borders Fund: The External Borders Fundwas part of the European Commission’s GeneralProgramme “Solidarity and Management of Migra-tion Flows“ for the period 2007–2013 (successor:see Internal Security Fund). The fund aimed to estab-lish financial solidarity within the Schengen Areaby supporting those countries for which implementa-tion of the common standards for controlling andsurveillance of the Schengen external borders repre-sented a heavy financial burden.
8
Eurodac: The European Union's centralised finger-print database for asylum-related matters.
FRONTEX: European Agency for the Management ofOperational Cooperation at the External Borders ofthe Member States of the European Union. FRONTEXcoordinates joint operations between Member Statesin the management of external borders, assists inthe training of national border guards including theestablishment of common training standards, carriesout risk analysis, follows research developmentsrelevant for the control and surveillance of externalborders, assists Member States in circumstancesrequiring increased technical and operational assist-ance at external borders, and provides MemberStates with the necessary support for organisingjoint return operations.
Illegal immigration: All forms of migration thatare unauthorised and therefore unlawful.
“Integrated Border Management Action Plan“Steering Committee: Working group establishedby the Federal Council (hereinafter referred to asthe “Steering Committee“: cf. Annex II) comprisingrepresentatives from the Confederation (FDFA: CD;FDF: SBG; FDJP: FOM, fedpol; DDPS: FIS) and thecantons (KKJPD, KKPKS, VKM and one representativeeach from the cantonal police forces of Zurich andGeneva). The tasks of this Steering Committee en-compass verification and decision-making regardingthe results of project work and validation of thepresent action plan for the Federal Council.
Internal Security Fund: The Internal Security Fund(ISF) is part of the EU’s proposed Home Affairs fund-ing for the period 2014-2020. The ISF is comprisedof two instruments: one for police cooperation (ISFPolice) and one for financial support of external bor-der management and the common visa policy (ISFBorders & Visas). As the successor instrument to theExternal Borders Fund (EBF), ISF Borders & Visas isa development of the Schengen Acquis and providesparticipating states with the means for supportingmeasures related to external borders and visa policy.
JANUS: Encrypted communication systemof the federal criminal police (fedpol).
KKJPD: The Conference of Cantonal Justice andPolice Directors brings together the cantonal govern-ment members responsible for the areas of “Justice“and “Police“. Its purpose is to facilitate the cantons’cooperation among themselves, with the Confeder-ation and with other organisations in the field ofjustice and police.
KKPKS: Based on its role as an operational specialistconference, the Conference of Cantonal Police Com-manders of Switzerland acts as the executive bodyof the KKJPD and deals mainly with matters of policemanagement. This committee focuses on cooperationamong the police forces and on defining joint strate-gies and the generation of synergies.
ORBIS: New visa-issuance system (successor to EVA)(since 20 January 2014).
People smuggling, qualified: Facilitation of illegalentry or transit of a person and/or illegal residencewith the intention of unlawful enrichment or as partof an ongoing commercial operation run by organ-ised criminal gangs or networks as per Art. 116 (3)FNA. Whereas the IBM strategy uses the term “peo-ple smuggling“ in this context, this action plan usesthe term “qualified people smuggling“, which ismore precise in legal terms. In cross-references tothe strategy document, however, the term “peoplesmuggling“ is kept. Both terms are primarily used asdistinct from the offences described in Art. 116 (1)FNA, which are not the focus of the strategy docu-ment and this action plan.
Prefrontier area: Geographical area beyond theexternal borders (countries of origin and transit).
Prüm Decision: European Decision on the intensi-fication of cross-border cooperation, particularlyfor the prevention of terrorism, cross-border crimeand illegal immigration. Cross-border prosecution isfacilitated through the easier exchange of DNA pro-files and fingerprints between Prüm Member States.
9
Risk analysis: Structured gathering and evaluationof relevant data to assess the level of threat withregard to illegal immigration.
Schengen: The Schengen Agreement, in existencesince 1985, promotes freedom of movement betweenthe participating countries through the removal of sys-tematic border controls without reasonable suspicion.To compensate for this, and to increase the SchengenMember States’ internal security, checks at the Schen-gen external borders are intensified. Crossborder coop-eration between national police forces is also steppedup. This cooperation is centred on the Schengen Infor-mation System (SIS), a joint electronic database fortracing individuals. The national operational structurebehind the SIS is the SIRENE office (or simply SIRENE),which forms part of the fedpol operations centre.
Schengen commitment appropriation: The contin-uous development of the Schengen/Dublin Acquisand the acceptance of new states in the SchengenArea call for new and expanded IT applications ata national level. To finance this work (including themaintenance of existing systems), two commitmentappropriations have been requested to date.
SSK (formerly KSBS): The Conference of SwissProsecution Authorities fosters cooperation and theexchange of views among all cantonal and federalprosecution authorities operating in criminal matters.Its primary activity is early participation in legislativework on criminal law and procedural law.
Swiss Police Institute: This Institute provides train-ing and further development of police personnelfrom all over Switzerland. The SPI’s Board of Trusteesincludes representatives of the Confederation, theKKJPD, the KKPKS, the Association of MunicipalPolice Chiefs (SVSP) and the Association of SwissPolice Officers (VSPB).
Technical Committee for ID Documents: A com-mittee set up as part of the “Operating Conceptfor the E-document System Platform“, with productresponsibility for the → E-document System Plat-form. The committee includes representatives ofFOBL, FOM, CD, fedpol and FCA.
Third country: A non-Schengen Member State.
Visa Steering Committee: Committee with repre-sentatives from the Consular Directorate (CD) ofthe FDFA, the cantons (represented by the VKM)and the FOM on institutionalisation of cooperationin visa-related matters. The Visa Steering Committeeplays a leading role in developing strategies andprocedures with respect to visas.
VISION: Visa Inquiry Open Border Network; auto-mated procedure for consulting with other SchengenStates regarding the granting of Schengen visas.
10
Foreword
Dear reader
The tragic pictures from Lampedusa – and the suffering that takes place there regularly –have touched many of us. This small Italian island may be over 1000 kilometres away –but these human tragedies concern Switzerland nevertheless: in particular, our bordermanagement.
Within Europe, Schengen stands for an important milestone: the freedom of movement.Since Switzerland joined the Schengen Area in 2008, the systematic control of peopleat our borders made way to a more sophisticated system: free movement within theinternal borders – tighter controls at the external borders.
To prevent organised crime groups, smuggling gangs and other criminals from misusingthis freedom of movement, compensatory measures had been introduced alongside fromthe beginning. For example, police cooperation with Schengen states has been strength-ened and harmonised, and equipped with state-of-the-art technology such as theSchengen Information System (SIS).
However, to keep abreast of the growing complexity and dynamics of legal and illegalmigration, the individual Schengen member states – including Switzerland – must rethinktheir strategy.
An efficient and integrated border management is the most effective means of meetingthese challenges. Following on from the Federal Council’s approval in 2012 of a corres-ponding strategy, I am pleased to present the following action plan, which representsan important milestone in this matter.
As a tourist destination, Switzerland benefits from Schengen: visitors to Europe who havea Schengen visa no longer need an additional visa to also spend their holidays in Switzer-land for example. However, the strongly increasing number of passengers travelling throughour airports sometimes brings the border control agencies to the limits of their capacitiestoday. Speeding up border controls by means of automatic gates, as foreseen under theaction plan, will take some of the pressure off the border control authorities while expand-ing Switzerland’s appeal as a tourist destination and economic centre.
In our federal system, with six different border management agencies at federal andcantonal level, harmonisation of border management practices must be ensured at all times.Harmonisation, from training to day-to-day work at the border, is thus a main pillar of theaction plan.
Integrated border management equips us to deal with the challenges of the future. Greaterefficiency in this field will ultimately take some of the burden off the federal and cantonalauthorities. Costs arising from illegal migration, especially in the area of return, are expectedto fall and, for legal travellers, crossing borders will become even easier.
I would like to thank all our partners for their committed and constructive cooperation,which made the compiling of this action plan possible.
Mario GattikerDirector of the Federal Office for Migration (FOM)
Mario GattikerDirector of the Federal Officefor Migration (FOM)
11
Dear reader
The Cantons recommended the approval of the accession to Schengen/Dublin with greatconviction in 2005. The agreements promised not only better mobility for citizens ofthe Schengen member states by abolishing the systematic control of people at Switzer-land’s borders, but also substantial improvements in combating crime. Nowadays, crim-inals – especially smugglers and human traffickers – operate transnationally. Schengenprovides the authorities with additional instruments to fight crime, thus enhancingthe security of Switzerland.
After more than five years as a member of Schengen, Switzerland has not becomeless safe: Switzerland’s track record in fighting and solving crime proves this. The dailycollaboration with our European partners illustrates the importance of the agreementfor the police and judiciary in a Europe that has never been as interconnected andas open as it is today.
However, there would be no need for an action plan if there was no potential for im-provement. Our federalist structure, with numerous border management agencies andpolice corps, requires close and end-to-end cooperation between all stakeholders to pre-vent Switzerland from becoming a gateway for criminals. The action plan will improveand intensify the at times complex cooperation between the cantons and their federalpartners.
The cantons play a central role in Swiss border management since they are responsible,together with the Confederation, for the operative implementation of border measures.For example, Swiss border police at the airports are often the first face that foreignvisitors see when they arrive in our country: they are Switzerland’s “business card”,so to speak. The cantonal police are also visible in their daily work, where they helpto expose illegal activities in the field of migration and hence prevent evasion of ourlegal system and damage to our economy.
As in all migration matters, the basic message in protecting our borders should be:“Harnessing the benefits of migration – opposing the problems efficiently!“
You can find out more about our concrete measures in this action plan.I wish you a good read.
Hans-Jürg KäserPresident of the Conference of Cantonal Justiceand Police Directors (KKJPD)
Hans-Jürg KäserPresident of the Conferenceof Cantonal Justiceand Police Directors (KKJPD)
12
0. Management Summary
After acknowledging the Final Report of the “Inte-grated Border Management“ Strategy Group in June2012, the Federal Council set up an interdepartment-al working group with cantonal participation underFOM leadership to formulate an action plan forimplementation of the strategy.
Integrated border management creates the followingadded value for Switzerland, and thus also forthe entire Schengen Area:
• Increased internal security;• Smoother border crossings for the travelling public;• Simplified and harmonised processes, resultingin a more efficient use of resources;
• Faster response times as a result of bettercooperation;
• More targeted use of limited resources throughimproved national risk analysis;
• A long-term, joint strategic approach.
With the broad participation of all agencies directlyinvolved, some 70 measures were defined in fivesubprojects (based on the four-filter model, cf.Chapter 4) with a view to attaining the objectivesset out in the strategy.• The “Third Countries” subproject encompassesthe first filter of the four-filter model and thus theactivities in countries of origin and transit (thirdcountries). The measures here focus mainly onoptimising procedures at Swiss representationsabroad;
• The “International Cooperation” subproject, likethe second filter, concentrates on measures foroptimising cooperation within the Schengen Area;
• The focus of the “Border” subproject is on thethird filter, i.e. the actual border control measuresat Schengen external borders (airports);
• The “Internal” subproject covers measures withinthe Schengen Area (fourth filter), especially regard-ing enforcement and qualified people smuggling;
• Finally, the “General” subproject contains measuresthat could not be clearly allocated to one of thefour filters/subprojects on account of their cross-cutting nature, e.g. information exchange, analysis,data reconciliation.
The measures defined in the action plan relate tooperational as well as strategic aspects. They rangefrom one-off measures for optimising the existingsituation to large-scale innovations. Some of themhave already been implemented, while some existonly in the form of studies to formulate further meas-ures. Taken individually, but especially as a whole,all of the measures make an important contributionto improving Swiss border management, laying thefoundation for attaining the general goals definedin the strategy.
The action plan envisages a staggered implementa-tion of the measures in three realisation phasesover the period 2014–2017. It also includes measuresthat are currently in progress or have already beenimplemented. The implementation work will beoverseen by the Entry Division of the FOM andan extended configuration of the existing BorderSteering Committee.
The cantons play a key role in implementation of thisaction plan. A framework agreement between theConfederation and the cantons will provide the basiccommitment and consensus on the action plan,paving the way for further joint implementationwork. The framework agreement will govern, amongother things, issues of cooperation, organisationand monitoring.
13
Financing has been secured for those measuresthat have already been initiated or are even alreadyimplemented. The financial and personnel impactof the remaining measures on the Confederationand cantons has been estimated, subject to certainconditions. Measures that could not be sufficientlydeveloped within the given time frame have beenformulated as studies or concept mandates to furtherexamine, in particular, the necessary resources.The action plan complies with the requirements ofbudget neutrality, where this is defined as an integralfactor covering all government levels. The specialistoffices involved in its formulation unanimously expecteach individual measure to reduce future expenditurefor the public sector as a whole to an extent that jus-tifies the cost of their implementation. The financingremains the responsibility of the agencies entrustedwith implementation.
What is border management?
Border management encompasses all officialactivities along the migration or travel process.Apart from actions and instruments fallingdirectly under border control, this also includesupstream activities in countries of origin ortransit (third countries) as well as internal meas-ures downstream. It also covers actions relatedto international cooperation. This four-tierimmigration control model (“four-filter model”)is described in more detail in Chapter 4.
14
1. Introduction
The Schengen Association Agreement fundamentallychanged the regime for the control of persons atthe external borders: while controls of persons havebeen virtually abolished at internal borders, checksat the external borders have been stepped up. Thischange to the system required new measures to becoordinated throughout the Schengen Area in thecombat against illegal immigration and cross-bordercrime. This calls for closer cooperation between bor-der management agencies, even at a national level,and better coordination of the various measures.
The EU Evaluation Committee, which in 2008/2009evaluated implementation of the requirements ofthe Schengen Acquis at external borders (airports),1
recommended in its report that Switzerland shoulddevelop a “comprehensive national plan containingall elements of integrated border management (…)“.Switzerland agreed to fulfil this recommendationand to formulate a national plan for the efficientand coordinated prevention of illegal immigrationand cross-border crime.
The “Integrated Border Management“ StrategyGroup set up by the Federal Council has formulatedan integrated border management strategy thatcomprises all relevant players at federal and cantonallevel. This was based on the EU’s IBM strategy,2
particularly the four filters of the Schengen bordersecurity model (cf. Chapter 4). In addition tothe police-related aspects of border management,the strategy also defines objectives regardingthe facilitation of legal entry.
On 1 June 2012, the Federal Council acknowledgedthe Strategy Group’s Final Report and, at the sametime, issued a mandate for formulating an action plan.This was to contain concrete measures for attainingthe individual objectives set out in the strategy. Thework commenced in September 2012 under the lead-ership of the FOM. The agencies involved in the “In-tegrated Border Management Action Plan“ workinggroup were the same as those previously involved informulating the strategy. At federal level, these werethe FDJP (FOM, fedpol), the FDFA (CD), the FDF (SBG)and the DDPS (FIS). The cantons’ interests were suita-bly addressed through the participation of the KKPKS,the KKJPD and the VKM (one member each). The Ge-neva and Zurich cantonal police forces also contribut-ed to the working group with one representative each.In order to cope with the broad thematic scope, thecomplexity and the large number of individual objec-tives to be addressed, the overall project managementteam placed five subprojects under the managementof the agencies most concerned. The results fromthe subprojects were then conveyed to the “Integrat-ed Border Management Action Plan“ working group,which assumed the role of a steering committeewithin the internal project organisation (cf. Annex II).
1 A further evaluation of the external borders took place in June 20142 Conclusions of the Justice and Home Affairs Council on 4-5 December 2006 (2768 th Justice and Home Affairs Council Meeting in Brussels)
15
In the present report (particularly from Chapter 5 on),the results of the “Integrated Border ManagementAction Plan“ working group are consolidated to formthe action plan itself.
The action plan should be viewed against the back-drop of the IBM strategy it seeks to implement. Chap-ter 4 thus provides a brief outline of the strategy andits essential features. In turn, the strategy is markedby the framework conditions (particularly legal) andby the phenomenology of legal and illegal immigra-tion and cross-border crime. This is covered in Chap-ter 3. Even an integral approach, as underlies theIBM strategy and the ensuing action plan, must bedefined in terms of the scope and interfaces withrelated issues and themes: this can be found underChapter 3.4 below. The advantages of such an inte-grated approach form the subject of Chapter 2.
3 Final Report of the “Integrated Border Management” Strategy Group, January 2012
The following Chapters 2 to 4 are largely basedon the chapters of the same name from the “FinalReport of the Integrated Border ManagementStrategy Group“ (hereinafter “the strategy“),3
which have been summarised and updated hereto place the Final Report in context.
16
2. The added value ofintegrated border management
Underlying the concept of integrated border manage-ment (IBM) is the realisation that none of the variousinstitutions and agencies involved in the vast field ofborder management can operate on their own: thetask areas are simply too complex, and there are toomany points of contact between the individual play-ers. Only with increased networking of the relevantagencies can substantial improvements be achievedin border management, leading to:• Increased internal security, e.g. by apprehending
more people smugglers and illegal residents andthereby preventing associated offences such asunreported employment and human trafficking
• Smoother border-crossings for the travellingpublic, e.g. with shorter waiting times or fasttrackprocedures, which also help to make Switzerlandmore attractive for business
• Simplified and harmonised processes resultingin a more efficient use of resources, e.g.by coordinating the controls of various agencies
• Faster response times as a result of bettercooperation between the agencies involved
• Improved national risk analysis at both the stra-tegic and operational levels, making more targeteduse of the limited resources
• A long-term, joint strategic approach, enablingborder management agencies to act not solelyon the basis of current threats but also with regardto future challenges.
The IBM concept has already been implementedin many EU and non-EU countries. There are success-ful examples of IBM existing among the old andthe new EU Member States, e.g. in Germany, France,Finland as well as in the Czech Republic. However,as each country must adapt the form and contentof its national IBM concept to its own geopoliticaland institutional circumstances, and each countrystarts out with a different integration scenario, therecan be no hard-and-fast rules for implementation.
As practice has shown, a plan involving so manydifferent agencies has to be based on a commonunderstanding of the various problems (e.g. basicanalysis, problem catalogue) and the objectivesto be fulfilled and must be reviewed on a regularbasis and updated if necessary.
Following on from the federal and cantonal agree-ment in 2012 on a national integrated bordermanagement strategy (cf. Chapter 4), this reportpresents the action plan outlining the measuresfor implementing the strategy.
17
3. Scenario
3.1 Facts and figures
The world is becoming increasingly mobile, with asteady rise in Europe in the number of travelling pub-lic and in migratory pressure. In Europe alone, thenumber of people crossing airport borders is expectedto increase from 400 million in 2009 to 720 millionby 2030.4 Similarly, border management agencies arefacing growing challenges in having to control andfilter ever-increasing numbers of travellers and immi-grants. If the number of border crossings at Switzer-land’s external borders were to increase to the sameextent, the number of staff solely responsible for bor-der control at Zurich Airport – Switzerland’s largestexternal border – would have to increase by some20%, unless the increase in passenger numbers canbe offset by technical innovations, greater efficiencyand other measures as set out in the action plan.
3.1.1 Travel movements across the externaland internal borderWhen the Schengen/Dublin Association Agreementcame into effect on 12 December 2008, Switzerlandbecame part of the Schengen Area, surroundedexclusively by other Schengen Member States.The borders to Germany, France, Italy, Austria andLiechtenstein are now internal Schengen borderswith no systematic passport control. As a result,Switzerland’s only external borders are at its airports.Switzerland currently has 12 such border-crossingpoints, the most important of these in terms of vol-ume being Zurich, Geneva and Basel airports.
At the three largest airports alone, some 14 millionpeople a year cross the border to and from non-Schengen countries. An estimated 240 million peoplecross Switzerland’s internal borders annually, of whomsome 24 million by air and 216 million by land.
In 2013 Switzerland processed around 500000 appli-cations for a Schengen visa5 (airport transit or short-term stay of up to 90 days), plus around 60000 appli-cations for a national visa (long-term stay of over 90days). The overall rejection rate was around 5%.
3.1.2 Illegal immigrationSwitzerland is confronted by various forms of illegalimmigration, such as qualified people smuggling andillegal entry/departure or illegal residence in Switzer-land.
Qualified people smugglingAs an international phenomenon, people smugglingknows no boundaries. The criminal gangs involved insuch practices are highly organised into internationalnetworks, which create the actual platform for illegalimmigration. The vast majority of illegal immigrantsuse the services of international people-smugglingnetworks to get from their country of origin or a tran-sit country to their destination. For instance, thesenetworks arrange travel documents for would-beimmigrants (e.g. a forged passport or fraudulentlyobtained visa), transportation and often also a ficti-tious reason for entry. This also applies for thoseseeking asylum in Switzerland.
4 EUROCONTROL Long-Term Forecast: Flight Movements 2010-2030, December 2010
http://www.eurocontrol.int/publications/eurocontrol-long-term-forecast-flight-movements-2010-20305 It should be noted that, in principle, individuals with a Schengen visa issued by another Schengen State can also enter Switzerland.
Also, certain visas allow for multiple entries. Therefore, the number of visas issued by Switzerland is not a direct or conclusive indication
of the number of travel movements
18
Fig. 1: Issued and rejected visas
Schengen Visas
600000
500000
400000
300000
200000
100000
0
2009
36052
2
2914
2
7088
3
2010
39619
3
2313
0
5994
9
2011
43438
3
2470
6
6087
9
2012
47792
2
2668
0
6027
4
2013
48885
6
2822
1
6221
5
n Total of Schengen visasissued by Switzerland
n Total of national visasissued by Switzerland
n Total of rejectedvisa applications
Facilitating unlawful entry or departure or unlawfulresidence is a punishable offence (Art. 116 FNA).Depending on the form it takes, it may be classifiedas a misdemeanour (para. 1), contravention of thelaw (“minor offence” as per para. 2) or a crime(”qualified offence” as per para. 3) punishable bya custodial sentence of up to five years and a fine.Since enactment of the FNA, there have been severalhundred convictions a year in application of theappropriate punishment. However, compared withthe number of people thought to be smuggled eachyear, very few convictions (only around 20 a year)are deemed a qualified offence.6
Entry refusals at the external bordersIn 2013 the border control agencies at Switzerland’sSchengen external borders registered a total of 966cases of denial of entry for failure to meet the entryconditions. The main reason given for entry refusalwas failure to produce a valid visa or a valid residencepermit, followed by enforcement of an entry ban pre-
viously issued by a Schengen Member State. The thirdmost common reason for being denied entry wasthe lack of sufficient financial means. Other reasonsincluded visa overstay, incorrect, forged or falsifiedtravel documents, insufficient proof of purpose ofstay, not being in possession of a valid travel docu-ment, presentation of an incorrect, forged or falsifiedvisa or residence permit, or posing a threat to publicsecurity and order.
Given Switzerland’s geographical circumstances, withno sea or land external borders, there is very littlechance of entering the country unchecked via a Schen-gen external border. For the Schengen Area as awhole, however, it is estimated that some 500000people a year enter illegally7 and are subsequentlyfree to move around the Schengen Area and maketheir way to Switzerland.
6 The corresponding statistics for 2013 were not yet available at the time of publishing this action plan7 European Commission: Justice, Freedom and Security in Europe since 2005: An Evaluation of the Hague Programme and
Action Plan. Brussels 2009. Page 6 and: University of Sussex. Transnational migration. Theory and method of an ethnographic analysis
of border regimes. 2009. Page 8
19
2013
Fig. 2: Convictions for facilitating/preparing unlawful entry/departure or residence under Art 116 FNA
Convictions under art. 116 FNA
1000
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
2010
871
755
61
233 20
2009
948
67
731 22
821
2011
60
1 17 15
687
594
2012
44
226 20
586
494
n Total convictionsArt. 116 FNA
n Para 1(a) (facilitation/preparation of unlawfulentry/exit or residence)
n Para 1(b) (procure-ment of unauthorisedemployment)
n Para 1(c) (facilitation/preparation of unlawfulentry to third country)
n Para 2 (minoroffence)
n Para 3 (qualifiedas for financial gainor by criminal gang)
Illegal residenceWithin the territory of Switzerland, illegal immigrationis detected upon intercepting people who do not havea legal right of residence. The SBG alone recordedmore than 10000 people in 2013 without a legitimateresidence status (no details are currently available fromthe cantonal and municipal police forces).
In 2013, there were some 3000 cases of illegal resi-dence detected upon departure via the externalborder. This includes people who entered legally andsubsequently overstayed their visa as well as thosewho entered illegally in the first place and never hada legitimate residence status.
A total of some 10000 infringements of entry condi-tions (Art. 115 (1) (a) FNA) and some 18000 casesof illegal residence (Art. 115 (1) (b) FNA) were detectedwithin Switzerland in 2011.
Overall, it is estimated that some 90000 undocu-mented immigrants8 are living in Switzerland.
8 Claude Longchamp et al., Sans-Papiers in der Schweiz: Arbeitsmarkt, nicht Asylpolitik ist entscheidend. Bern 2005. Page 1
20
450
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
Entry refusals by reason
n 2012 n 2013
No valid visa/residencepermit
Entry ban Insufficientmeans ofsubsistence
No appropriateproof of purposeand conditions
of stay
Overstay False,counterfeit,
or forged traveldocument
No valid traveldocument
Threat tointernal security
or order
False,counterfeit,or forged visaor residence
permit
319
269
235
208
94
199
74
92
9486
4055 49 42
3 9 11 6
Fig. 3: Entry refusals by reason
3.1.3 Asylum21465 asylum applications were filed in Switzerlandin 2013, of which 384 were at Zurich, Geneva, andBasel airports. In 5339 cases, immigrants interceptedby the SBG subsequently filed for asylum and weretranferred to an FOM reception and processing centre.
There were thus 2.68 asylum seekers in 2013 for every1000 inhabitants, placing Switzerland in third placein Europe (excluding the microstates), after Swedenand Malta. The European average in 2013 was 0.85asylum seekers per 1000 inhabitants.
23966 first-instance decisions were issued, witha recognition rate of 15.4%.
The average cost per asylum seeker was aroundCHF 18000 a year.
3.1.4 ReturnSome 6800 cases of administrative detention wererecorded in 20129 for the removal of undocumentedimmigrants and/or rejected asylum seekers (mainlydetention pending deportation, but also coercive de-tention and detention in preparation for departure).This figure has been increasing since 2008.
In 2013, a further 12000 people were officiallyremoved from Switzerland by air. This was the firstyear-on-year decline since Switzerland joined theSchengen Area (2012: approximately 13800 persons).A further 6800 people left the country unofficiallyor went missing.
The exit and enforcement costs incurred by the FOMcame to over CHF 34.5 million in 2013. The mainexpenditure items were: exit costs (CHF 13.7 million);compensation of detention costs to the cantons(CHF 15.3 million); costs for acquiring travel papers;costs for determining origin and identity; flight costs;accompanying costs; delegation expenses for centralconsultations; and costs for airport services.
9 The corresponding statistics for 2013 were not yet available at the time of publishing this action plan
21
Fig. 4: Illegal stay
Illegal stay
20000
18000
16000
14000
12000
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
3.1.5 Cross-border crimeFollowing the removal of systematic controls on per-sons when crossing the border at European internalborders, crime in Central Europe has become moremobile and international (irrespective of Switzerland’sparticipation in Schengen). To combat this trend, vari-ous instruments have been created within Schengento expand and intensify the level of interagency coop-eration in cross-border security. Also, mobile units cannow conduct surveillance within the territory.
A range of Schengen Association measures serve toimprove international judicial and police cooperation inthe prevention of cross-border crime. These include se-curity measures associated with increased cross-borderpolice cooperation, such as the Europe-wide SchengenInformation System (SIS) or better mutual legal assis-tance. The recording and exchange of biometric dataamong Schengen States in the centralised Europeanbiometrics database BMS (Biometric Matching System)also supports more efficient crime prevention.
In the public’s perception of cross-border crime, thisis a problem that tends to be associated with freedomof movement and Switzerland’s membership of theSchengen Area. Opinions vary between the cantons,especially those adjacent to a national border, withsome cantons barely noticing any change, while othersare clearly experiencing higher crime rates (e.g. attackson petrol stations), especially in urban areas (e.g.Geneva and Basel).
Based on the current facts, however, no direct relation-ship can be determined between immigration and/orthe Schengen Association and rising crime rates inSwitzerland. As border controls were not systematiceven before the introduction of Schengen and customschecks continue at the same rate as before, the intro-duction of Schengen has merely shifted the focus ofcontrol but not actually changed its intensity to anygreat extent. Also, special-purpose checks can stillbe carried out, as before the Schengen Association.
3467
2009
1097
7
7453
2010
4349
1167
6
6774
2011
5614
1299
5
8277
201298
99
1480
1
9619
2013
1068
4
1780
7
1021
9
n Total of detections of illegalstay by the SBG in the internalarea (Switzerland)
n Total of complaints acc.to art. 115 para. 1 lit. a FNA(violation of entry provisions)
n Total of complaints acc.to. art. 115 para. 1 lit. b FNA(illegal stay)
22
Fig. 5: Asylum applications per 1000 inhabitants in 2013
Asylum applications per 1000 inhabitants in 2013
SWE
MLT
CHE
NOR LIE
AUT
LUX
HUN
BEL
DNK
DEU
BGR
FRA
CYP
NLD
Mean
GRC FIN
GBR ITA ISL
POL
HRV IRL
SVN
LTU
ESP
LVA
SVK
EST
ROU
CZE PRT
6,00
5,00
4,00
3,00
2,00
1,00
0,00
5,95
5,39
2,68
2,54
2,35
2,13
2,08
1,94
1,52
1,36
1,35
1,02
1,00
0,99
0,86
0,85
0,75
0,61
0,46
0,45
0,43
0,40
0,24
0,20
0,14
0,10
0,09
0,09
0,08
0,08
0,07
0,06
0,05
3.2 Legal aspects
Pan-European cooperation in police, judicial andmigratory issues is primarily enshrined in the 1990Convention Implementing the Schengen Agreement(CISA)10 With the Schengen Association Agreement(SAA)11 from 2004, Switzerland assumed the Schen-gen Acquis applicable at that time and agreed toaccept, implement and apply all future developmentsof Schengen. Switzerland is thus integrated into theSchengen system in most areas of border manage-ment. Switzerland is entitled to participate in futuredecision-shaping but not decision-making. It thusparticipates in expert meetings in Brussels, where itcan make its position known. This right to decision-shaping is significant because, as a rule, the subse-quent decision-making is made on a consensual basis.After being notified of the passing of a Schengen-relevant development, Switzerland has 30 days to
express its acceptance. If the legal act notified ismandatory, the EU’s notification and Switzerland’sreply form an exchange of notes, which representsan international treaty for Switzerland. Therefore,in accordance with the Constitution and the law,the power of approval lies with the Federal Councilor Parliament. In the latter case, the exchange ofnotes is subject to parliamentary approval and possi-bly an optional referendum. Switzerland has a maxi-mum of two years for acceptance and implementa-tion in this case. For regulations concerning bordermanagement matters, the Borders Code12 and theVisa Code13 are applicable. At a national level, theseprovisions are transposed primarily in the ForeignNationals Act14 and the associated implementingordinances.
10 EU Official Journal L 239 of 22 September 2000, p. 0019-006211 SR 0.362.3112 Regulation (EC) No. 562/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2006 establishing a Community Code
on the rules governing the movement of persons across borders (Schengen Borders Code)13 Regulation (EC) No. 810/2009 of the European Parliament and the Council of 13 July 2009 establishing a Community Code on Visas
(Visa Code)14 Federal Act of 16 December 2005 on Foreign Nationals; Foreign Nationals Act (FNA; SR 142.20)
23
3.3 Definition of responsibilities
The Swiss Border Management Strategy and thepresent action plan derived from it are aligned withSwitzerland’s federal structures. While strategicresponsibility for national border management liesprimarily with the Confederation (FDJP)15, operationalresponsibility for implementing border control meas-ures lies partly with the cantons.16 For instance, morethan half of the Schengen external border trafficflows through Zurich airport, controlled by Zurich’scantonal police force. The other cantons have (atleast partially) delegated their tasks in the control ofpersons at the external border to the SBG. Strategicand operational responsibility for measures withinthe territory lies also mainly with the cantons, particu-larly the police, the public prosecutor’s office andthe migration agencies. Here, too, some cantons havedelegated certain tasks to the SBG. Responsibilitiesfor measures in third countries and for internationalcooperation are distributed across various federalgovernment departments (FDFA: CD; FDF: SBG; FDJP:FOM, fedpol). Consequently, implementation of anational strategy on integrated border managementmust include and politically commit a wide range ofplayers at many different levels. As a rule, directivesmay be issued only within the individual organisationalunits but not beyond these. Incorporating such small-scale structures into the overall Schengen system,where transnational cooperation plays a key role, pos-es a major challenge. To complicate matters further,the agencies responsible for border management arehaving to cope with stagnating financial and humanresources at a time when their workload is expandingand increasingly complex in terms of both qualityand quantity.
3.4 Scope and interfaces
The Swiss IBM concept outlined here – like thatof most other Schengen States – concentrates onpolicing measures to reduce illegal immigration andon ways to detect illegal immigrants and supportenforcement of removal measures. This is closelyrelated to efforts to combat qualified human smug-gling, which in many cases acts as a platform forillegal immigration, and other forms of cross-bordercrime that frequently accompany or follow on fromillegal immigration. At the same time, however, sucha concept must also ensure that legitimate entryby the travelling public is processed as smoothly aspossible and that border management as a wholecomplies with the law and with the principles ofhuman rights.
This IBM concept overlaps with the report on inter-national cooperation in migration17 on certainpoints (namely, activities in the countries of originor transit of illegal immigration or cooperation withother countries). In that report, the Federal Councilspecifies the instruments of Swiss migration foreignpolicy and sets out the following three principles:
• Switzerland adopts a comprehensive approachthat addresses the social, economic and culturalbenefits of immigration as well as the associatedchallenges (irregular immigration, removal, humantrafficking);
• Switzerland promotes cooperation between thecountries of origin, transit and destination;
• An inter-departmental (whole-of-government)approach is taken so as to efficiently utilise theinstruments available in the area of migration(international and regional migration dialogue,migration partnerships, programmes for refugee“protection in the region“, prevention of irregularmigration, and return and structural assistance).
15 Art. 12 of the Organisation Ordinance of the Federal Department of Justice and Police (OO FDJP; SR 172.213.1)16 Art. 9 FNA17 “Bericht über die Internationale Migrationszusammenarbeit”, passed by the Federal Council on 16 February 2011
24
Switzerland’s international cooperation in migrationtakes a holistic and thus an even broader approachthan the concept of integrated border management,i.e. it also includes preventative measures targetingthe causes of illegal immigration (“push factors”),which do not form part of the IBM concept.
The entire field of customs control, which concernsthe cross-border transportation of goods, is to acertain extent closely related to border management.Special areas in this field include import/export meas-ures for plants, animals and animal products, as wellas immigration medical screening. In contrast tothis, the IBM strategy and action plan concentrateon issues concerning the entry and exit as well asthe residence of foreign persons.
Finally, the economic sphere also has various strat-egies dealing with the targeted promotion of touristtraffic. This often relates to economic promotion inthe wider sense – such as growth strategies in tour-ism or marketing strategies of airport operators –and is less concerned with the actual managementof these (legal) migration flows.
The Swiss border management strategy deliberatelytakes a narrower approach, excluding most of thoseareas just mentioned. It should be noted that thisstrategy is expandable, however, and it can be associ-ated with existing strategies.
In the discussions on Switzerland’s national IBM strat-egy, questions also arose on the distribution of tasksand responsibilities within the Confederation and,more especially, between the Confederation and thecantons. Particularly with respect to actual bordercontrol and police activities within Switzerland,the existing distribution of responsibilities was seenby some as problematic or at least less than ideal.
At the same time, and largely independently of this,the distribution of responsibilities between theConfederation and the cantons with regard tointernal security underwent a general review as partof the Malama18 postulate. In its report in responseto the postulate19, the Federal Council sees no reasonfor any major changes to the arrangements applic-able in the areas covered by the IBM strategy. TheFederal Council’s response to the Romano20 postulateis along the same lines, with a recommendation forrejection. This postulate has not yet been debatedin Parliament.
It is thus possible to retain the same approach chosenin the strategy, which envisages only those objectivesbased on the current definition of responsibilities.The measures formulated in the present action planfollow this same logic.
18 Malama Postulate 103045, Internal Security. Clarification of responsibilities, 3 March 201019 Federal Council’s report in response to the Malama postulate 103045 (in German), 2 March 201220 Romano Postulate 133551, Expansion of the Border Guard’s responsibilities. Illegal immigration and asylum, 20 June 2013
25
4. Switzerland’s IBM strategy
The decision to formulate a Swiss strategy of inte-grated border management was prompted by arecommendation from the Schengen evaluation in2008/2009, which specifically referred to the four-tier immigration control model (“four-filtermodel”) used in the Schengen Area. This modelassumes that measures to ensure efficient and suc-cessful prevention of illegal immigration shouldbegin even before the Schengen external border,in the countries of origin or transit, and shouldalso include measures within the Schengen Area.
Activities in countries of origin or transit 21 form thefirst filter in the prevention of illegal immigrationand cross-border crime. For example, a typical meas-ure in this respect is the visa procedure or the useof Airline Liaison Officers (ALOs) to assist airlinesby providing consulting and training in documentcontrol.
The second filter covers bilateral and multilateralcooperation with other countries (mainly SchengenMember States) in a joint effort to combat illegalimmigration and cross-border crime. Apart fromparticipation in various European and internationalorganisations, this also includes, for example, re-admission agreements with other Schengen Mem-ber States.
The third filter constitutes the actual border controlat the external border and focuses on technical inno-vations to assist in border control, such as the Regis-tered Traveller Programme (RTP) or Advance PassengerInformation (API).
The fourth filter covers all measures taken withinthe Schengen Area to prevent illegal immigration.This refers to all instruments that increase the likeli-hood of detection and/or improve or accelerateenforcement.
Activities that can be assigned to several filters ratherthan just one are called filter-independent activities.
This model, recognised in the context of Schengen,also serves as the basis for Switzerland’s integratedborder management model.
The various elements of the strategy are outlinedbelow. More detailed explanations can be foundin the Final Report.
4.1 General goals
Switzerland’s strategy for integrated border manage-ment defines the following four general goals:• Prevention of illegal immigration, particularly
in association with people smuggling• Prevention of cross-border crime• Facilitation of legitimate entry for the travelling
public• Border management in compliance with
the law and human rights principles
These general goals can be subdivided into twogroups, each of equal importance. On the one hand,the strategy must make a key contribution to prevent-ing illegal immigration as well as people smuggling.On the other hand, it must also ensure that legitimatetravellers are processed as smoothly as possible andthat border management as a whole complies withthe law and the principles of human rights. As such,the general goals blend seamlessly into Switzerland’smigration policy.
21 In the context of border management, third countries and countries of origin are often also referred to as the “prefrontier area”
26
4.2 Strategic guidelines
The strategic guidelines are, on the one hand, a reflec-tion of Switzerland’s political commitment to cooper-ate in the Schengen security union: they embed Swit-zerland’s border management within the Schengencontext and ensure its alignment with not just nationalstrategies but also the strategic and practical develop-ment in the Schengen Area and contribute to itsdesign. On the other hand, the strategic guidelinesalso contain general requirements for effective andefficient management.
4.3 Problem areas
Switzerland’s strategy for integrated border manage-ment consciously focuses on those areas found tohave definite potential for optimisation and in whichstrategic realignment is expected to yield the greatesteffect. The result is a collection of specific problem
areas (problem inventory) based on the underlyinganalysis, broken down into four filters and reworkedfollowing extensive discussions.
4.4 Individual objectives
A total of 49 individual objectives (cf. Annex I) werederived from the problem areas, with each problemarea generally assigned several objectives. The individ-ual objectives can be presented according to the four-filter structure. They can also be divided into threemain subject areas:
Intensification of nationwide approachThe Swiss border management system is character-ised by a large number of agencies responsible: atfederal level alone, these are spread over four ofthe seven federal government departments.22 Thereare also the cantonal administration and judicial au-thorities, i.e. immigration offices, police and judicial
22 FDFA (DEA, CD), FDF (FCA, especially SBG), FDJP (FOM, fedpol) and DDPS (FIS)
Figure 6: Four-filter model
Four-filter model(component of the EU’s system of integrated border management)
Filter 1
Activities in third countries
Filter 2
Cooperation withinthe Schengen Area
Filter 3
Measures at border control
Filter 4
Measures withinthe territory
For example
• Visa procedure
• Airline Liaison Officer(ALO)
• Migration Attachés
• Cooperation with /sanctioning of airlines
For example
• FRONTEX
• Liaison Office / Officers
• Council Study Group
For example
• Schengen-compliantcontrol of external border
• Automated border control
• Advance PassengerInformation (API)
• Entry-Exit-System (EES)
• Registered TravellerProgram (RTP)
For example
• Targeted internal controls
• Measures to detectforgeries
• Enforcement
Legitimate immigrationIllegal immigration / cross-border crime
27
bodies. For around half of the 49 individual object-ives, there is the hidden danger of failing to takea national approach, despite the many advantagesto such a federal, decentralised allocation of respon-sibilities. Weaknesses were mainly identified in theareas of information exchange, analysis, and situ-ational awareness with no or very little cost com-pensation.
Optimisation and harmonisation of training,equipment, infrastructures and proceduresThe large number of agencies responsible for bordermanagement not only poses a risk to the requirednationwide approach and the corresponding situ-ational awareness. At an operational level too, aroundhalf of the individual objectives are attributable tothe challenges posed by such a wide distribution ofcompetencies. The aim is to attain equivalence inthe main training points, efficient procurement anduse of equipment and infrastructures, and uniformbest practices.
Improved cooperation at an international leveland with the private sectorRoom for improvement was found in internationalcooperation with respect to operations (Filters 1, 3and 4) as well as strategic policy (Filter 2). Aroundone-eighth of the individual objectives seek progressin the operational and strategic policy exchange withother Schengen and EU Member States, in coopera-tion with private-sector firms (especially airlines) andin the exchange of information between Swiss andforeign border control agencies and police agencies.
4.5 Sustainability
On 1 June 2012, the Federal Council acknowledgedSwitzerland’s IBM strategy formulated in agreementwith the cantons.
The strategy sets out the main thrust of Switzerland’sborder management and, in principle, was designedfor the following five to seven years. This time horizongives sufficient flexibility for thorough and sustainableimplementation of the objectives defined in the pres-ent action plan.However, the requirements set out in the strategyshould not be viewed too rigidly, as it must still bepossible to absorb unforeseen events and new trends.A periodic test of effectiveness and general review ofthe entire strategy is thus crucial. The Border SteeringCommittee takes charge of the annual review. Thiscommittee under FOM leadership currently includesrepresentatives from the SBG, fedpol, and the Zurichand Geneva cantonal police forces. The Border Steer-ing Committee meets once a year in an extendedconfiguration with FDFA (CD), DDPS (FIS), VKM,KKJPD and KKPKS specifically to discuss ”IntegratedBorder Management“.
28
5. Action plan
5.1 Introduction
The action plan contains concrete measures for attain-ing the individual objectives set out in the strategy.The work on developing these measures commencedin September 2012 and was performed by the sameagencies who had previously participated in formulat-ing the strategy.
On account of the broad thematic scope, the complex-ity and the large number of individual objectives tobe addressed, the overall project management teamdecided to define the measures within five separatesubprojects. These correspond to the same subjectareas as the four filters (cf. Chapter 4). In addition tothe subprojects “Third Countries” (Filter 1), “Interna-tional Cooperation” (Filter 2), “Border” (Filter 3) and“Internal“ (Filter 4), a “General” subproject was setup to cover typical cross-cutting themes.
The main agencies involved in each case were broughtin to lead the subprojects. These collaborated withthe relevant cantonal and federal stakeholders for eachsubproject (cf. organisational chart in Annex II). Informulating the measures, therefore, a broad base ofexpert knowledge could be drawn upon. The meas-ures were consolidated by the subproject staff directlywith their submitting organisations, which led to con-siderable time savings with regard to the acceptanceof measures in the steering committee and thus theproject as a whole.
Differing perceptions of the various problems anddisparities attributable to the different outlooks be-tween operational agencies and those with a morestrategic orientation were repeatedly encountered.The discussions within the subprojects also highlight-ed the difficulties raised by so many different playersworking together on a daily basis. Not unexpectedly,Switzerland‘s federal structures proved one of thegreatest challenges in formulating measures withthe level of integrality required by the strategy. Toa certain extent, the creative scope was also restrict-ed by financing issues and institutional frameworkconditions.
The results of the subproject work completed at theend of May 2013, i.e. the measures formulated withinthe subprojects, are presented in this chapter. Thesubchapters correspond to the five subprojects. Foreach subproject, the problem areas and the individualobjectives are first outlined, drawn from the strategyand forming the basis for the subproject work. Thedrawn-up measures are then listed in the form of atable. Each table contains an explanation of the vari-ous measures, the agencies responsible, the indicatorsby which successful implementation can be measured,and the duration of the measures. An evaluation ofthe content of the measures developed can be foundunder the heading “Findings”, followed by a shortpresentation of the financial impact of the measures.
Quite a few of the measures developed as part of thesubprojects and described below were already imple-mented, or at least initiated, prior to acknowledgmentof the action plan, on account of their broad accept-ance and fast realisation. The measures describedbelow also include some that were initiated directlyafter acknowledgment of the strategy outside of theIBM action plan and/or whose financing was alreadysecured outside of the IBM action plan. The inclusionof projects that have already been implemented orinitiated gives a comprehensive overview of all IBMmeasures and thus also of the efforts made to attainthe four general goals defined in the strategy(cf. Chapter 4.1).
29
5.2 “Third Countries” subproject
5.2.1 OverviewThe ”Third Countries“ subproject covers the first filterin the four-filter model (cf. Chapter 4), i.e. activitiesconducted in third countries and countries of originfocusing mainly on measures to optimise proceduresat Swiss representations abroad. The strategyidentified two problem areas in this subproject:• Inadequate gathering, dissemination and/or use
of information available on site (P1.1)• Inadequate flow of information between
the levels of operations and strategic policy (P0.2)
For these two problem areas, the strategy defines fiveindividual objectives.
The underlying focus here is the trade-off betweenpreventing illegal immigration and promoting Swit-zerland as a business location and tourist desti-nation. Objective 1.1-5 calls for closer alignmentbetween the promotional efforts of economic andtourism stakeholders and the objectives of visa agen-cies and border control agencies as well as a moreefficient and traveller-friendlier visa procedure.
Objectives 1.1–1 and 1.1–2 address the availability ofsufficiently qualified consular staff at the representa-tions abroad and raising their awareness of the phe-nomena in relation to illegal immigration and peoplesmuggling. The strategy also calls for more intensiveutilisation of local cooperation with other Schen-gen Member States in the relevant third countries(Objective 1.1–3). The prevention of illegal immigra-tion and people smuggling should thus be more tar-geted and successful by pooling the various on-siteforces.
In the second problem area of the ”Third Countries“subproject, individual objective 0.2–4 of the strategyseeks to make Switzerland’s assistance to the coun-tries of origin and transit of illegal immigrants contin-gent upon their adoption of measures against peoplesmuggling.
The measures formulated to meet the five individualobjectives are listed in the following table.
30
Mea
sure
23Ex
planation
Responsibility
Rea
lisation
phase2
4
Duration
Indicators
Commen
ts
1.1–
1–1:
Listof
hotspot
coun
tries(illega
limmigratio
nvs.S
witzerland
’secon
omic/
tourism
interests)
Keepalistof
hotspot
coun
tries,
upda
tedyearly,
with
thevaria
bles
“Illega
limmigratio
n”(focus)a
nd“S
witzerland
’secon
omic/tou
rism
interests”
with
theob
jectiveof
making
amoretargeted
andconscien
tious
useof
resourcesat
therepresen
tatio
nsab
road
.
Lead
:GNAM
25
Participation:
FOM,S
BG,fed
pol,CD,
FIS,
VisaSteerin
gCom
-mittee
1Pe
rman
ent
Deliveryof
aspecificlistof
coun
triesby
theoffices
involved
(ann
ually)a
ndap
provalthereo
fby
the
VisaSteerin
gCom
mittee.
Estim
ationof
resources,training
,etc.in“P
reventi-
onof
illeg
alim
migratio
n”an
d“E
cono
mic/tou
rism
prom
otion”
ontheba
sisof
thelistof
hotspot
coun
tries
Resourcesan
dtask
plan
ning
attherepresen
tatio
nsab
road
ontheba
sisof
thelistof
hotspot
coun
tries
Thismeasure
serves
asaba
sis
formeasures
1.1–
1–2,
1.1–
1–3,
1.1–
2–1,
1.1–
3–1an
d1.1–
5–1
Dep
ende
nton
measure
0.1–
3–1(“Gen
eral”subp
roject):
FOM
willtake
thelead
ifthe
GNAM
isno
tim
plem
ented,
orin
thepe
riodpriorto
itsim
plem
entatio
n
1.1–
1–2:
Coo
rdinationof
Air-
lineLiaisonOfficers(ALO
s),
Immigratio
nLiaisonOfficers
(ILOs),P
oliceAttaché
s(PAs)
andDefen
ceAttaché
s(DAs)
Vario
uscoordina
tionmeasuresin
theop
erations
oftheseOfficers
and
Attaché
sto
improveefficiency,
espe
ciallyin
theho
tspot
coun
tries
Lead
:CD
Participation:
Arm
edForces
Staff,
FOM,S
BG,fed
pol
1Perm
anen
tPerforman
ceof
acu
rren
t-statean
alysis
Defi
nitio
nof
theoverlapp
ingof
individu
alroles
with
respectto
illeg
alim
migratio
n
Coo
rdinationof
stationing
concep
ts(overla
pping)
betw
eenoffices
Functio
ning
inform
ationflo
wbe
tween
theAttaché
s/ALO
s/ILOsan
dtheGNAM
26
Inform
ationflo
w:
Dep
ende
nton
interaliameasure
0.1–
3–1(“Gen
eral”subp
roject)
1.1–
1–3:
Training
mod
ule
“Illega
limmigratio
n”an
d“P
eoplesm
uggling”
for
represen
tatio
nsab
road
Locatio
n-specifictraining
mod
ule
inthefie
ldsof
“Illega
limmigratio
n”an
d“P
eoplesm
uggling”
forthe
lead
ingrepresen
tatio
nsab
road
onthelistof
hotspot
coun
tries
Integrationof
thismod
uleinto
the
training
concep
tsof
theag
encies
involved
forstaffaw
aren
esspu
rposes
Lead
:FO
M
Participation:
SBG,fed
pol,CD,FIS
1Perm
anen
tExistenceof
thege
neraltrainingmod
ule
Cou
ntry-spe
cific
conten
tdraw
nup
forthemost
impo
rtan
tcoun
trieson
thelistof
hotspot
coun
triesan
dintegrated
into
thetraining
mod
ule.
Increasing
orconstant
numbe
rof
visasrejected
onaccoun
tof
suspectedpe
oplesm
ugglingor
applican
tsno
texpe
cted
toad
dhe
reto
stated
purposeof
travel
Dep
ende
nton
measure
1.1–
1–1
1.1–
2–1:
Clarifi
catio
nof
need
srega
rdingtasks,resourcesan
dspecifickn
ow-how
forthe
lead
ingrepresen
tatio
nsin
the
coun
trieson
theho
tspot
list
Targeted
deploymen
tof
resources
(con
sularstaffan
dspecialists)a
ccor-
ding
totherepresen
tatio
ns’p
osition
onthelistof
hotspot
coun
tries
Lead
:DR,
CD
Participation:
FOM
11year
Com
pleted
clarificatio
nof
need
s
Hiring
,trainingan
dassign
men
tconcep
tforho
tspot
represen
tatio
ns
Adjustm
entsto
specificatio
nsba
sedon
theresults
oftheclarificatio
nof
need
s
Dep
ende
nton
measure
1.1–
1–1
23Themeasure
number
iscomprisedofthefilter
number
asper
thefour-filter
model(firstposition),thenumber
oftheproblemarea
withinthefilter
(secondposition),
thenumber
oftheindividualobjectivewithintheproblemarea
(thirdposition)andthenumber
ofthemeasure
withintheindividualobjective(fourthposition)
24Indicates
thestartofimplementation,cf.Section6.2
25Gem
einsames
Nationales
AnalysezentrumMigration(workingtitle;Jointnationalanalysiscentreformigration):seeMeasure
0.1–3–1ofthe“G
eneral”subproject(cf.Section5.6.2)
26Gem
einsames
Nationales
AnalysezentrumMigration(workingtitle;Jointnationalanalysiscentreformigration):seeMeasure
0.1–3–1ofthe“G
eneral”subproject
5.2.2Mea
sures
31
Mea
sure
23Ex
planation
Responsibility
Rea
lisation
phase2
4
Duration
Indicators
Commen
ts
1.1–
2–2:
Projectforop
timi-
satio
nof
thevisa
proced
ure(POV)
Verifi
catio
n,ad
aptatio
nan
dha
rmon
i-satio
nof
allvisaproc
esseswith
the
fede
raland
canton
alau
thorities
in-
volved
soas
toachievefast,u
niform
,tran
sparen
tan
dresource-savingvisa
proc
esses
FLead:
FOM
Participation:
Can
tona
lmigratio
nan
dlabo
urmarket
authorities,C
D,V
isa
Steerin
gCom
mittee,
VSA
A
0Perm
anen
tAna
lysisan
ddo
cumen
tatio
nof
processesconcerning
thevisa
proced
ure
App
rovalo
fop
timised
target
processes
andtheim
plem
entatio
nplan
formeasures
Uniform
applicationof
processesby
all
participatingau
thorities
Defi
nitio
nof
sequ
ence
andrespon
sibilities
forad
aptatio
nof
processes
App
rovalo
fmeasuresforsupp
ortin
gtheproced
urewith
technicalaidsan
dforprom
otingtran
sparen
cy
–
1.1–
3–1:
Targeted
useof
local
Sche
ngen
coop
eration(LSC
)by
therepresen
tatio
nsab
road
Provisionof
simpletools,gu
idan
cean
dinstructions
fortherepresen
ta-
tions
abroad
rega
rdingamoretarget-
edutilisatio
nof
LSCforthepu
rposes
ofinform
ationan
ddissem
inationof
ownfin
ding
son
illeg
alim
migratio
nan
dqu
alified
peop
lesm
uggling
Lead
:FO
M
Participation:
CD
2Perm
anen
tDefi
nitio
nof
therulesforLSC
Settingof
commun
icationpa
ths
Stan
dardised
feed
back
forcentralautho
rities
Instructions
from
centralautho
rities
totherepresen
tatio
ns
Testingof
themeasure
throug
hpe
riodicinspectio
nsat
represen
tatio
ns
Dep
ende
nton
measures
1.1–
1–1an
d1.1–
1–3
1.1–
5–1:
Mem
oran
dum
ofUnd
erstan
ding
(MoU
)be
tweenad
ministrative,
tourism
andecon
omicbo
dies
onraisingaw
aren
essan
dcoordina
tionof
marketin
gactivities
MoU
betw
eenvisa
andbo
rder
control
agen
cies,S
witzerland
Tourism
and
Switzerland
Globa
lEnterpriseon
early
inform
ationab
outmarketin
gan
dprom
otiona
lmeasuresin
thetourism
sector
andon
form
ulationof
the
correspo
ndingmeasures
Lead
:CD
Participation:
FOM,S
BG,C
PBE
,CPGE,
CPSO
,CPVS,
CPZH
,SECO,S
witzerland
Globa
lEn
terprise,
tourism
sector
21year
Sign
ingof
theMoU
Agreemen
ton
annu
alworksho
ps
Coo
rdinationof
ongo
ingplan
ning
Coo
rdinationof
applications
from
Switzerland
Tourism
fortheacqu
isition
/increase
ofmarketin
gmeans
with
theCD
Dep
ende
nton
measure
1.1–
1–1an
dim
pactson
measure
2.2–
2–2(“Inter-
natio
nalC
oope
ratio
n”subp
roject)
23Themeasure
number
iscomprisedofthefilter
number
asper
thefour-filter
model(firstposition),thenumber
oftheproblemarea
withinthefilter
(secondposition),
thenumber
oftheindividualobjectivewithintheproblemarea
(thirdposition)andthenumber
ofthemeasure
withintheindividualobjective(fourthposition)
24Indicates
thestartofimplementation,cf.Section6.2
5.2.2Mea
sures
32
5.2.3 FindingsDrawing up the list of hot spot countries (measure1.1–1–1), i.e. designating the focus countries for illegalimmigration and Switzerland’s economic and tourisminterests in these countries is one of the core measuresof the ”Third Countries” subproject. It not only formsthe basis for several other measures within Filter 1 butalso replaces, with a simple and resource-saving prin-ciple, the previous “one size fits all” approach to thetraining and deployment of consular staff in the pre-vention of illegal immigration. This list serves as abasis for the representations’ resources and task plan-ning. It also contributes to more efficient handlingof the trade-off between the prevention of illegalimmigration and the promotion of Switzerland as abusiness location and tourist destination. Other meas-ures in the ”Third Countries” subproject also specifi-cally seek to optimise the handling of this trade-off,mainly at Swiss representations abroad. Consular staffshould continue to act as and be seen as service pro-viders with respect to visa applicants. Nonetheless, inthe training and deployment of individual employees,more emphasis will be placed in future on police-related aspects that are already of central importancein the successful prevention of illegal immigration.
Promoting legal entry and supporting Switzerland as atourist destination are the subject of measure 1.1–5–1,which calls for the signing of a Memorandum of Un-derstanding (MoU) between the immigration and bor-der control agencies and the tourism and economicorganisations for the purpose of mutual agreement.This MoU balances the above trade-off by ensuringthat those involved in promoting tourism and the busi-ness location regularly inform the border managementagencies of planned promotion and marketing activi-ties. In return, they are kept informed by the immi-
gration and border control agencies of currentdevelopments and phenomena in relation to illegalimmigration. This measure also seeks a close align-ment between resource applications from Swiss Tour-ism (marketing funds) and the Consular Directorateof the FDFA (resources in relation to visas).Although already drawn up as a separated projectprior to formulation of the individual objectives,the project for optimisation of the visa procedure(1.1–2–2) is another key measure under Filter 1.This project will optimise the quality of the visa proce-dure in view of the expected rise in the number oftravelling public and limited official resources andharmonise the processes involved, making them moretraveller friendly. This will take account of Switzer-land’s interests as a business location and tourist des-tination while also addressing the official interests inpreventing illegal immigration. The starting point forthe project is to document the entire set of visa pro-cesses for the first time, across all agencies involved,so as to identify the potential for optimisation in thisrespect on an interagency basis. The jointly agreed onprocess template will then be applied uniformly, mak-ing the entire procedure faster and more transparent.
The steering committee decided not to further pursuethe draft measures developed in relation to objective0.2–4.27 This was on account of this objective beinglimited to the subject of people smuggling. The steer-ing committee was of the opinion that the issue ofconditionality should ideally be discussed within theframework of “International Migration Cooperation”.The agencies responsible for this platform – FOM,SDC and DPA – have already indicated their willing-ness to examine the requirements for conditionalityon an individual case-by-case basis.
27 Switzerland’s assistance to the countries of origin and transit of illegal immigrants is contingent upon their adoption
of measures against people smuggling
33
In terms of implementation, the dependencies be-tween the measures should be taken into account.Because of such interdependencies in this subproject,it is particularly important to check the measures’effectiveness at regular intervals.
5.2.4 Financial impactsThe financial impacts within the Third Countries sub-project are primarily related to personnel. Implement-ing the remaining measures generates mainly one-offpersonnel expenses. These correspond to an estimated150 man-days. Recurrent personnel expenses, oftenserving to update the instruments decided upon inthe measures, are substantially lower at approximately25 man-days. Most of these expenses for implement-ing the measures are incurred in the FOM and CD.
Measures associated with the list of hot spot countries(1.1–1–1) lead to a more targeted use of resources atSwiss representations abroad, resulting mainly in per-sonnel shifts though not necessarily any savings.
The material costs incurred in this subproject are low.The “Project for optimisation of the visa procedure”(1.1–2–2) stands out as being resource intensive. Theproject proposal estimates the costs of initialising theproject at around CHF 1 million and 440 man-days,with these expenses being distributed over four years.However, the project and implementation costs arealready covered by the agencies involved, beyond thescope of the IBM action plan.
Positive financial impacts occur through the facilitationof legal entry, one of the general goals defined in thestrategy. Measures in this area ensure that investmentsin promoting Switzerland as a business location andtourist destination reach more of the intended recipi-ents and that the benefit thus generated is not re-stricted by the police-related aspects (preventingillegal immigration).
5.2.5 SummaryThe measures developed in the Third Countries sub-project produce a more effective handling of thephenomena of illegal immigration as a result of thetargeted deployment of resources available at Swissrepresentations abroad. At the same time, thesemeasures produce a more in-depth and institutional-ised coordination between the tourism and businesssectors and the visa and border control agencies.Finally, optimising the visa procedure helps to facili-tate legal entry by way of processes that are moretraveller friendly and transparent.
34
5.3 “International Cooperation”subproject
5.3.1 OverviewThe ”International Cooperation“ subproject, corre-sponding to Filter 2 of the aforementioned four-filtermodel (cf. Chapter 4), focuses on measures to opti-mise cooperation within the Schengen Area. Thestrategy identified two problem areas with respectto international co-operation:• Switzerland’s limited institutional integration
in the EU (P2.1)• Inadequate cooperation and exchange of informa-
tion at the level of strategic policy (P2.2)
For these problem areas, the subproject drew up fiveindividual objectives, all of which concern a similarsubject matter. The first individual objective (2.1–1)focuses on improving cooperation in securitymatters with the EU and its Member States andstudying the possibility of participation in internationalcommittees or signing up to international agreements.Switzerland should thus examine and actively defendits position within the European security architectureon the basis of its long-term strategic interests.
The other four individual objectives28 seek to improvethe somewhat flawed exchange of information and toensure the strategic inclusion of Switzerland’s positionat an international level. On the one hand, Schengen-compliant measures for entry facilitation shouldbe identified and subsequently applied more specific-ally in international negotiations. On the other hand,Switzerland’s position, as defended by Switzerlandat a European level, should be better consolidatedinternally in advance, and information in this respectshould be more specifically disseminated on an inter-agency basis. This requires a harmonised, fixed andbroad-based position on the subjects covered inthis context.
The measures formulated to meet these five individualobjectives are listed in the following table.
28 2.1–2, 2.2–1, 2.2–2 and 2.2–3
35
29Themeasure
number
iscomprisedofthefilter
number
asper
thefour-filter
model(firstposition),thenumber
oftheproblemarea
withinthefilter
(secondposition),
thenumber
oftheindividualobjectivewithintheproblemarea
(thirdposition)andthenumber
ofthemeasure
withintheindividualobjective(fourthposition)
30Indicates
thestartofimplementation,cf.Section6.2
Mea
sure
29Ex
planation
Responsibility
Rea
lisation
phase3
0
Duration
Indicators
Commen
ts
2.1–
1–1:
Exam
inationof
Swit-
zerla
nd’spa
rticipationin
the
Europe
anMigratio
nNetwork
(EMN)
Stud
yto
clarify
theconseq
uences
ofSw
itzerland
’spo
ssible
participation
Lead
:FO
M
Participation:
DEA
01year
Decisionon
theba
sisof
thestud
yof
Switzerland
’spa
rticipationin
theEM
NTh
einform
ationreferssolelyto
the
stud
y.Th
iswillmakestatem
ents
oncosts,saving
s,preciserespon
sibilities
andthetim
ingof
anysuch
implem
en-
tatio
n.Itwillalso
provideinform
ation
onthepo
ssiblene
edfororga
nisatio
nal
orinstitu
tiona
ladjustm
ent
2.1–
1–2:
Exam
inationof
the
introd
uctio
nof
aSw
issRe
gis-
teredTravellerProg
ramme
(study)
Stud
yto
clarify
theconseq
uences
ofintrod
ucingaRe
gistered
Traveller
Prog
rammeforSw
itzerland
Lead
:FO
M
Participation:
SBG,o
perators
ofBa
sle,
Gen
eva,
andZu
richair-
ports,CPZH
,CD
01year
Decisionon
theba
sisof
thestud
yon
introd
uctio
nof
anRT
PTh
einform
ationreferssolelyto
the
stud
y.Th
iswillmakestatem
ents
oncosts,saving
s,preciserespon
sibilities
andthetim
ingof
anysuch
implem
en-
tatio
n.Itwillalso
provideinform
ation
onthepo
ssiblene
edfororga
nisatio
nal
orinstitu
tiona
ladjustm
ent
2.1–
1–3:
Greater
commitm
ent
inthefie
ldof
visa
liberalisation
EU/third
coun
tries
Proa
ctiveinclusionof
Swissexpe
rience
intheEU
visa
liberalisationprocesses
with
third
coun
tries
Lead
:FO
M,D
EA
Participation:
FOJ,fedp
ol,C
D,D
PA
0Pe
rman
ent
Activeinclusionof
Swisspo
sitio
nsin
theprocess
oftheEU
visa
liberalisationdialog
uewith
third
coun
tries
Discussionof
theSw
isspo
sitio
non
thevisa
liberalisations
plan
nedby
theEU
atbilateral
andmultilateral
meetin
gs
Draftingof
anoverview
onvisa
liberalisation
–
2.1–
1–4:
Exam
inationof
coop
erationwith
othe
rEu
ro-
pean
states
rega
rdingiden
tity
checks
andreturn
App
ointmen
tof
aworking
grou
pfortheform
ulationof
measuresan
dco
ordina
tionwith
othe
rEu
rope
anco
untriesin
thefie
ldof
iden
titychecks
onforeignna
tiona
ls(w
horequ
est
asylum
inSw
itzerland
orap
plyforre-
turn
assistan
ce)a
ndalso
inthefie
ldof
returningpe
rson
swith
anEU
resi-
dencepe
rmit
Lead
:FO
M
Participation:
DEA
,DIL,D
PA
0Perm
anen
tDecisionba
sedon
stud
y
Ifthestud
yproves
positive:
Drawingup
ofmeasuresby
theworking
grou
p
Holding
ofinternationa
lcon
ferences
onthissubject
Coo
peratio
nwith
othe
rEu
rope
ancoun
tries
forthepu
rposeof
iden
titychecks
–
5.3.2Mea
sures
36
29Themeasure
number
iscomprisedofthefilter
number
asper
thefour-filter
model(firstposition),thenumber
oftheproblemarea
withinthefilter
(secondposition),
thenumber
oftheindividualobjectivewithintheproblemarea
(thirdposition)andthenumber
ofthemeasure
withintheindividualobjective(fourthposition)
30Indicates
thestartofimplementation,cf.Section6.2
Mea
sure
29Ex
planation
Responsibility
Rea
lisation
phase3
0
Duration
Indicators
Commen
ts
2.1–
1–5:
Exam
inationof
adop
tingthePrüm
Decisions
forim
provingthepreven
tion
andprosecutionof
crim
inal
offences
In-dep
thstud
yof
therepe
rcussion
san
dconseq
uences
ofSw
itzerland
’spa
rticipationin
thePrüm
Con
vention
bythecanton
alan
dfede
ralautho
ri-tie
sinvolved
Lead
:fedp
ol
Participation:
FEDRO
,FOM,F
OJ,DEA
,DIL,FDPIC,FFA
,SBG
,KdK
,KKJPD,FIS,S
wiss
mission
attheEU
0Perm
anen
tPerio
dicevalua
tionof
whe
ther
tostartne
gotia
tions
onpa
rticipationwith
respectto
Swissinterests
Ifthisevalua
tionproves
positive:
startof
nego
tiatio
nsan
dattainmen
tof
afavourab
leresultforSw
itzerland
,particularlyin
institu
tiona
lmatterswith
subseq
uent
participation
–
2.1–
2–1:
Prioritisationof
projectsfortheInternal
SecurityFund
(ISF)-Borde
rs
Organ
isationof
aninform
ation
meetin
gan
daworksho
pon
joint
determ
inationof
theprioritisation
ofou
tstand
ingprojectsfortheyears
2014
to20
20
Lead
:FO
M
Participation:
DEA
,DIL,S
BG,fed
pol,
CPBE
,CPGE,
CPSO
,CP
VS,
CPZH
,CD
01year
Prioritisationcomplete
Prereq
uisite:
Participationof
Switzerland
intheInternalSecurityFund
(ISF)-
Borders
2.2–
1–1:
Catalog
ueof
possi-
bleconcession
srega
rding
visaswith
intheSche
ngen
legislation
Catalog
uelistin
gallS
chen
gen-compli-
antconcession
sin
thevisa-issuan
ceprocess
Lead
:CD
Participation:
FOM,F
OJ,DEA
,DIL
01year
Creationof
thecatalogu
eBa
sisformeasure
2.2–
1–2
2.2–
1–2:
Inclusionof
mea
s-ures
tofacilitateen
tryin
nego
tiatio
nson
migratio
nag
reem
entsan
dpa
rtne
rships
System
aticinclusionof
thecatalogu
e(m
easure
2.2–
1–1)
onen
tryfacilitation
inSw
itzerland
’sne
gotia
tions
with
third
coun
triesab
outmigratio
nag
reem
ents
andpa
rtne
rships
Lead
:FO
M
Participation:
DEA
,DIL,S
BG,fed
pol,
CPZH
,CD,FIS,D
PA
2Perm
anen
tDefi
nitio
nof
thestrategy
concerning
entry
facilitationof
therelevant
Swissag
encies
for
nego
tiatio
nswith
third
coun
tries
Dep
ende
nton
measure
2.2–
1–1
5.3.2Mea
sures
37
29Themeasure
number
iscomprisedofthefilter
number
asper
thefour-filter
model(firstposition),thenumber
oftheproblemarea
withinthefilter
(secondposition),
thenumber
oftheindividualobjectivewithintheproblemarea
(thirdposition)andthenumber
ofthemeasure
withintheindividualobjective(fourthposition)
30Indicates
thestartofimplementation,cf.Section6.2
Mea
sure
29Ex
planation
Responsibility
Rea
lisation
phase3
0
Duration
Indicators
Commen
ts
2.2–
1–3:
Vade
mecum
with
working
principles
forSw
iss
delega
tions
inworking
grou
psat
aEu
rope
anlevel
Draftingan
dregu
larup
datin
gof
avade
mecum
with
conc
rete
guidelines,
principles
andproc
essde
scrip
tions
for
Swissde
lega
tions
inworking
grou
ps/
committeesat
aEu
rope
anlevel,
includ
ingapresen
tatio
nof
thevario
usSche
ngen
/Dub
linco
mmittee
san
dworking
grou
psat
aEu
rope
anlevel
Lead
:FO
J,DEA
Participation:
FOM,D
IL,S
BG,fed
pol,
CD,can
tona
lrep
resenta-
tives
intheFD
JPfor
Sche
ngen
/Dub
lin
02years
Draftingan
dregu
larup
datin
gof
thevade
mecum
andits
dissem
inationto
thestaffco
ncerne
d–
2.2–
2–1:
Optim
isationof
the
dissem
inationof
inform
ation
onSw
itzerland
’spo
sitio
nsin
relatio
nto
migratio
nat
aEu
rope
anlevel
Improv
emen
tsto
thesearch
possibi-
litieson
theCH@World
platform
for
system
atictracking
ofSw
itzerland
’spo
sitio
nsat
aEu
rope
anleveland
also
cross-co
mmittee
developm
entswith
inado
ssier
Lead
:FO
J,DEA
,Swissmission
attheEU
Participation:
situationa
linclusion
ofothe
rfede
raland
canton
alag
encies
02years
Develop
men
t,introd
uctio
nan
dregu
larup
datin
gof
theim
proved
inform
ationplatform
–
2.2–
2–2:
Con
tact
listfor
“Illega
limmigratio
n/pe
ople
smug
gling”
Listof
theag
encies
involved
inthe
fieldsof
border
man
agem
ent,illeg
alim
migratio
nan
dpe
oplesm
uggling,
internationa
lcom
mitteeswith
Swiss
participationin
thisfie
ld,the
consulta-
tionmecha
nism
san
dthesign
ificance
ofthevario
ustopics
forIBM
Lead
:FO
M
Participation:
allage
nciesinvolved
intheareasof
border
man
agem
ent,illeg
alim
migratio
nan
dpe
ople
smug
gling
0Perm
anen
tDraftingan
dpe
riodicup
datin
gof
thelist
–
5.3.2Mea
sures
38
5.3.3 FindingsThe analysis of the subject areas covered by this sub-project, conducted together with all agencies involved,shows that there is already a good degree of inter-agency cooperation in defending Swiss interests atEuropean level. Switzerland’s inclusion in the Europeancommittee is largely satisfactory. The measures formu-lated thus concentrate on optimising and occasio-nally improving existing forms of national and inter-national cooperation.
Examining the cooperation with EU Member States re-garding identity checks and return (measure 2.1–1–4)is a key measure for including more of Switzerland’spositions at a European level. This concerns migrationflows of third-country citizens within the SchengenArea. Once of the consequences of the economiccrisis is the growing number of third-country citizenswith a residence permit for an EU/EFTA Member Statewho travel for economic reasons to Switzerland, wherethey then apply for asylum or obtain social welfare orreturn assistance. This potential for fraud cannot beresolved solely in bilateral cooperation with the thirdcountries, as these tend to have very little influenceon their citizens’ migratory movements within theSchengen Area. However, Switzerland can seek jointsolutions through targeted cooperation with its Euro-pean partner states. A working group will thereforebe established to coordinate and align the procedurein the fields of identity checks and returning third-country citizens with a legal residence permit foran EU/EFTA Member State.
Measure 2.1–1–5 is also important with regard tocooperation at a European level. Based on a study,the possibility of Switzerland adopting the PrümConvention will be examined. While this is not partof the Schengen acquis, a special Association Agree-ment gives the states associated with Schengen thepossibility of participating in this cooperation of Euro-pean states. At the operational level, in particular,participation would improve the prevention of cross-border crime, avoid a potential security gap, andsupplement European cooperation in security matterswithin the framework of Schengen.
The issue of facilitation, i.e. the promotion and sim-plification of legal entry (cf. Chapter 4.1), forms thesubject of measures 2.2–1–1 and 2.2–1–2. The firstof these serves to identify all of the simplifications inthe visa-issuance process that comply with the Schen-gen Acquis. These can then be applied within theframework of Switzerland’s negotiations with thirdcountries on migration agreements and partnershipsas a strategic negotiation pawn (measure 2.2–1–2).
The agencies represented in the subproject decidednot to formulate any measures for objective 2.2–3,31
as the present exchange of information was deemedto be sufficiently institutionalised and functioning,with respect to the cantons as well as the federalagencies.
Some of the measures32 shown in the table are alreadybeing implemented; however, as they still form partof the integrated border management system, theyare also listed in the action plan. Nonetheless, thecosts of such measures already in progress shouldnot be included in the overall costs of the action planas they have already been budgeted and coveredelsewhere.
31 A regular and systematic flow of information exists between the federal offices and the cantons regarding the immigration-related topics
discussed on the various committees32 Measures 2.1–1–2 (Examination of introduction of a Swiss Registered Traveller Programme), 2.1–1–3 (Greater commitment in the field of visa
liberalisation EU / third countries) and 2.1–1–5 (Examination of adopting the Prüm Decision to improve the prevention and prosecution of
criminal offences)
39
5.3.4 Financial impactsWith the exception of measure 2.2–1–2 (Inclusion ofmeasures to facilitate entry in negotiations on migra-tion agreements and partnerships), all of the meas-ures under the “International Cooperation” subprojecthave already been initiated or even implemented.Their financing was secured outside the scope of thisaction plan. Implementation of measure 2.2–1–2does not require any substantial additional resources.
The costs incurred through implementation of themeasures for this subproject are primarily personnelcosts, borne mainly by the FOM. The FOJ, DEA andCD are also involved to a considerable extent.
The results of the three studies (measures 2.1–1–1,2.1–1–2 and 2.1–1–5) or a decision to participatein the relevant committees, programmes and otherforms of cooperation could possibly entail signifi-cant follow-up costs. Should adoption of the PrümDecision be deemed desirable, the Confederationhas already agreed on an allocation formula for thefinancial expenses.33
Savings are made through the facilitation of legit-imate immigration, e.g. through measure 2.2–1–2(Inclusion of measures to facilitate entry in negotia-tions on migration agreements and partnerships).This is because optimisation of the visa-issuing pro-cess frees up certain resources that can be usedelsewhere in the prevention of illegal immigration.Optimised and facilitated legal migration also in-creases Switzerland’s attraction as a businesslocation and tourist destination.
5.3.5 SummaryGiven the largely satisfactory cooperation with otherSchengen States, the measures in the InternationalCooperation subproject mainly comprise occasionalimprovements to existing forms of cooperation. Thiswill make it even easier in the future to secure a con-sistent Swiss position at international level and to in-troduce this in a more expedient way. In negotiationswith third countries, Switzerland can simplify legalentry more specifically through Schengen-compliantentry facilitation. The measures also result in bettermutual information and optimised harmonisation ofthe positions of national agencies. The focus remainson the evaluation of Switzerland’s possible participa-tion in European committees such as the EuropeanMigration Network, the Registered Traveller Pro-gramme and the Prüm Decision. However, the resultsof these studies or any further steps will dependin part on Switzerland’s negotiations with the EUin institutional matters.
33 Agreement of 27 July 2011 between the federal agencies and the KKJPD
40
5.4 “Border” subproject
5.4.1 OverviewThe focus of the ”Border“ subproject is on the thirdfilter of the four-filter model, i.e. the actual bordercontrol measures at Schengen external borders(airports).
This subproject covers six of the problem areas ad-dressed in the strategy:• Insufficient networking at an operational level
(P2.3)• Different standards in subareas of border control
(P3.1)• Insufficient networking of the border control
agencies with regard to information exchangeand cooperation (P3.2)
• Increasing computerisation of border control raisesnew challenges for the control staff (P3.3)
• Trade-off between economic interests and thoseof the border police (P3.4)
• Border control system is circumvented by personswho conceal their identity or who evade immediateremoval through abuse of the asylum system (P3.5)
The strategy defines 11 individual objectives forthese problem areas, divided into the followingsubject areas:
National and international exchange of informa-tion between border control agencies: With sixdifferent border control agencies covering Switzer-land’s 12 airports with external borders, improved co-ordination between these agencies is imperative.
Quality assurance of border control: The strategycriticised the different standards in subareas of bordercontrol, partly as a result of the fact that differentagencies are in charge of border control tasks.
Training: For the most part, border control officersare today trained by their own agency, leadingto discrepancies in the curriculum and thus alsoin practice.
Process optimisation: The procedures and processesin the field of border control are relatively complex andat times unnecessarily resource intensive on accountof the many different players at federal and cantonallevel.
Identification: Several of the identification difficul-ties raised in the strategy result in a higher levelof abuse by illegal immigrants but also avoidabledisruptions for legitimate travellers and tourists.
Financing of border control: In principle, the steadyrise in tourist traffic has a positive impact on the Swisseconomy. At the same time, however, it requires aconstant input of new resources in the field of bordercontrol, which must be borne by the public sector.
The 15 measures formulated under this heading areoutlined below.
41
34Themeasure
number
iscomprisedofthefilter
number
asper
thefour-filter
model(firstposition),thenumber
oftheproblemarea
withinthefilter
(secondposition),
thenumber
oftheindividualobjectivewithintheproblemarea
(thirdposition)andthenumber
ofthemeasure
withintheindividualobjective(fourthposition)
35Indicates
thestartofimplementation,cf.Section6.2
Mea
sure
34Ex
planation
Responsibility
Rea
lisation
phase3
5
Duration
Indicators
Commen
ts
2.3–
1–1:
Exchan
geof
infor-
mationwith
foreignbo
rder
controlage
ncies
Ann
ualcon
tact
betw
eeneach
Categ
oryAan
dBairport
border
controlage
ncyan
daforeignbo
rder
control
agen
cy(strateg
ican
dop
erationa
llevel)
Registratio
nof
foreigncontactsan
dexchan
geof
finding
smad
ein
theBo
rder
Steerin
gCom
mittee
(perman
ent
item
ontheag
enda
)
Lead
:SB
G,
CPBE
,CPGE,
CPSO
,CPVS,
CPZH
Participation:
Border
Steerin
gCom
mittee
3Pe
rman
ent
Ann
ualrep
ortin
gby
theCateg
oryAan
dBairport
border
controlage
nciesin
theBo
rder
Steerin
gCom
mittee
onthefin
ding
sfrom
interactionwith
foreignbo
rder
controlage
ncies
–
2.3–
1–2:
Jointvisits
offoreign
border
controlage
ncies
Jointvisits
bySw
issbo
rder
controlage
nciesto
their
foreigncoun
terparts
(e.g.toview
new
techno
logy
orforjointprojects)
Notificatio
nof
visits
andrepo
rtingin
theBo
rder
Steerin
gCom
mittee
Lead
:SB
G,
CPBE
,CPGE,
CPSO
,CPVS,
CPZH
Participation:
Border
Steerin
gCom
mittee
3Perm
anen
tInclusionof
finding
sfrom
jointvisits
bySw
iss
toforeignbo
rder
controlage
nciesin
thede
cision
-makingprocessin
jointprojects
–
3.1–
1–1:
Mutua
laud
itsof
theSche
ngen
externalbo
rder
airports(borde
rcontrol)
Draftingan
dim
plem
entatio
nof
aco
ncep
tforpe
rfor-
mingregu
larau
dits
ofCateg
oryAan
dBairports
(borde
rcontrol)
Duringtheau
dits:V
erificatio
nof
compliancewith
natio
-na
ldire
ctives
andEU
guidelines
inthefie
ldof
border
control(pa
rticularlyconcerning
Sche
ngen
evalua
tions)
andtheexchan
geof
bestpractices
Lead
:FO
M
Participation:
SBG,
CPBE
,CPGE,
CPSO
,CPVS,
CPZH
2Perm
anen
tRe
gularpe
rforman
ceof
audits
atCateg
oryAan
dBairports
–
3.1–
2–1:
E-learning
tool
for
basican
dfurthe
rtraining
inthefie
ldof
border
control
Develop
men
tof
aun
iform
teaching
aidforba
sican
dfurthe
rtraining
(e-le
arning
tool
+printedversion)
inthefie
ldof
border
control,coverin
gtheen
tirespectrum
(includ
ingprofi
ling)
Lead
:SB
G,C
PZH
Participation:
SBG,
CPBE
,CPGE,
CPSO
,CPVS
0Pe
rman
ent
Roll-ou
tof
aun
iform
e-learning
tool
forbo
rder
controlw
ithin
thebo
rder
controlage
ncies
Improv
emen
tan
dha
rmon
isationof
training
,resulting
instrong
ercoop
erationbe
twee
nbo
rder
controlage
ncies
–
5.4.2Mea
sures
42
5.4.2Mea
sures
34Themeasure
number
iscomprisedofthefilter
number
asper
thefour-filter
model(firstposition),thenumber
oftheproblemarea
withinthefilter
(secondposition),
thenumber
oftheindividualobjectivewithintheproblemarea
(thirdposition)andthenumber
ofthemeasure
withintheindividualobjective(fourthposition)
35Indicates
thestartofimplementation,cf.Section6.2
Mea
sure
34Ex
planation
Responsibility
Rea
lisation
phase3
5
Duration
Indicators
Commen
ts
3.1–
3–1:
Coo
rdinationof
procurem
entprocessesin
thefie
ldof
border
control
Registratio
nof
future
ITprojectsan
dinfrastructure
inthefie
ldof
border
controlintheBo
rder
Steerin
gCom
mittee
Thelatter
exam
ines
thene
edforjointor
coordina
ted
procurem
ent(e.g.throu
ghtheprog
rammeman
agem
ent
“Harmon
ised
SwissPo
liceIT[HPI]”)
Lead
:Bo
rder
Steerin
gCom
mittee
Participation:
FOM,S
BG,
fedp
ol,
CPBE
,CPGE,
CPSO
,CPVS,
CPZH
1Pe
rman
ent
Coo
rdinationof
theprocurem
entof
ITan
dinfrastructure
inthefie
ldof
border
controlb
ytheBo
rder
Steerin
gCom
mittee
–
3.2–
1–1:
Nationa
lexcha
nge
ofinform
ationon
strategic
andop
erationa
lmatters
inthefie
ldof
border
control
Institu
tiona
lised
exchan
geof
inform
ationon
operationa
lan
dstrategicfin
ding
sbe
tweenthebo
rder
controlage
n-cies
intheBo
rder
Steerin
gCom
mittee
(perman
entite
mon
theag
enda
)
Lead
:Bo
rder
Steerin
gCom
mittee
Participation:
SBG,
CPBE
,CPGE,
CPSO
,CPVS,
CPZH
2Pe
rman
ent
Strategicor
operationa
lfind
ings
betw
eenbo
rder
controlage
nciesas
ape
rman
entite
mon
theag
enda
intheBo
rder
Stee
ringCom
mittee
–
3.2–
1–2:
Exam
inationof
restructuringof
existin
gworking
grou
psin
thefie
ldof
border
control
Exam
inationof
whe
ther
theexistin
gworking
grou
psin
thefie
ldof
border
controlcou
ldbe
restructured
soas
toavoidtheirfurthe
rmultip
licationan
dthus
anincrease
inthetim
ecommitm
ents
ofbo
rder
controlage
ncies
Lead
:FO
M
Participation:
SBG,
CPBE
,CPGE,
CPSO
,CPVS,
CPZH
11year
Noad
ditio
naltim
espen
ton
meetin
gsof
theworking
grou
psin
thefie
ldof
border
control
afterackn
owledg
men
tof
theIBM
actio
nplan
–
3.4–
1–1:
Participationof
airportow
ners
inthecosts
ofbo
rder
controland
lega
lba
sisforairportcatego
ries
Creationof
alega
lobligationfortheow
nersof
airports
with
Sche
ngen
externalbo
rdersto
providetherespon
sible
border
controlage
ncieswith
thespace,
infrastructure
and
technicalequ
ipmen
trequ
iredforbo
rder
controland
removalfree
ofcharge
Lead
:FO
M
Participation:
FOCA,FOJ
1Perm
anen
tFina
ncingby
theairportow
nersof
thecostsfor
thespace,
infrastructure
andtechnicalequ
ipmen
trequ
iredforbo
rder
control
–
43
Mea
sure
34Ex
planation
Responsibility
Rea
lisation
phase3
5
Duration
Indicators
Commen
ts
3.4–
1–2:
Exam
inationof
abo-
lishing
theexem
ptionregime
forno
n-Sche
ngen
fligh
tsat
Categ
oryDairports
Exam
inationof
abolishing
thecurren
tlyap
plicab
leexem
ptionregimeforCateg
oryDairports
(which
dono
tconstitutean
externalbo
rder
butmay
occasion
ally
begran
tedexem
ptions
bytheFO
Mforno
n-Sche
ngen
fligh
ts)
Defi
nitio
nof
therequ
iremen
tsforairports
tobe
allowed
toofferno
n-Sche
ngen
fligh
tson
ape
rman
entba
sis
(Schen
genexternalbo
rder)
Lead
:FO
M,F
CA/DGC
Participation:
FOCA,S
BG,
Owne
rsof
airports
inSaan
en,M
ollis,E
mmen
andBu
ochs,
CPBE
,CPGL,
CPLU
,CPNW,C
PZH
21year
Decisionon
theba
sisof
thestud
y
Ifthestud
yproves
positive:
Abo
litionof
theexem
ptionregimeforno
n-Sche
ngen
fligh
tsat
Categ
oryDairports
Listof
therequ
iremen
tsforairportsin
orde
rto
beallowed
toofferno
n-Sche
ngen
fligh
tson
ape
rman
entba
sis(Schen
genexternalbo
rder)
–
3.5–
1–1:
Gen
eralconcep
tfortheutilisatio
nof
fligh
tpa
ssen
gerda
ta
Draftingof
age
neralcon
cept
fortheutilisatio
nof
fligh
tpa
ssen
gerda
ta(especially
inrelatio
nto
Advan
cePassen
-ge
rInform
ation[API]a
ndPassen
gerNam
eRe
cord
[PNR]
data)
Lead
:FO
M,fed
pol
Participation:
FOCA,FOJ,DEA
,DIL,
FDPIC,FCA,
CPBE
,CPGE,
CPSO
,CPVS,
CPZH
,KKPK
S,FIS
21year
Ratifi
catio
nof
thege
neralcon
cept
bytheFede
ral
Cou
ncil
Exchan
geof
expe
riencewith
atleaston
eothe
rSche
ngen
Statein
theutilisatio
nof
fligh
tpa
ssen
ger
data
Securin
gof
follo
w-ups
from
thege
neralcon
cept
–
3.5–
1–2:
Autom
ated
border
controlatairports
Performan
ceof
automated
border
controlfor
adultEU
/EFTA
andCHna
tiona
lsat
airports(w
hencrossing
the
Sche
ngen
externalbo
rder)
Lead
:SB
G,
CPBE
,CPGE,
CPZH
Participation:
CPSO
,CPVS,
fedp
ol
3Pe
rman
ent
Border
controlfor
10%
ofad
ultEU
/EFTAan
dCHna
tiona
lsisau
tomated
whe
ncrossing
Swiss
Sche
ngen
externalbo
rders
–
3.5–
1–3:
Strategy
for
performingkey-po
int
checks
atthega
te
Defi
nitio
nof
astrategy
forpe
rformingad
vancebo
rder
controlsan
dpo
lice-ledintra-Sche
ngen
controlsat
the
gate
byeach
border
controlage
ncy
Perio
dicexchan
geof
strategies
andfin
ding
sin
theBo
rder
Steerin
gCom
mittee
Lead
:SB
G,
CPGE,
CPZH
Participation:
CPBE
,CPSO
,CPVS,
Border
Steerin
gCom
mittee
0Perm
anen
tIncreasedintercep
tionof
fligh
tpa
ssen
gers
having
reache
dthega
tewith
outfulfilling
entry
requ
iremen
ts
–
34Themeasure
number
iscomprisedofthefilter
number
asper
thefour-filter
model(firstposition),thenumber
oftheproblemarea
withinthefilter
(secondposition),
thenumber
oftheindividualobjectivewithintheproblemarea
(thirdposition)andthenumber
ofthemeasure
withintheindividualobjective(fourthposition)
35Indicates
thestartofimplementation,cf.Section6.2
5.4.2Mea
sures
44
5.4.2Mea
sures
Mea
sure
34Ex
planation
Responsibility
Rea
lisation
phase3
5
Duration
Indicators
Commen
ts
3.5–
1–4:
Regu
larcontact
with
airline
sClose,reg
ular
contactbe
tweenthebo
rder
control
agen
cies
andtheairline
sstatione
dat
theairport
Instructionof
airline
staffin
thede
tectionof
illeg
alim
migratio
n
Lead
:SB
G,a
irlines,
CPBE
,CPGE,
CPSO
,CPVS,
CPZH
Participation:
Border
Steerin
gCom
mittee
0Pe
rman
ent
Redu
ctionin
thenu
mbe
rof
fligh
tpa
ssen
gers
who
dono
tmeettheen
tryrequ
iremen
tswhe
ncrossing
theSche
ngen
externalbo
rders
ontheba
sisof
theirtravel
documen
ts
–
3.5–
1–5:
Increasedde
ploy-
men
tof
AirlineLiaison
Officers(ALO
s)(con
cept)
Draftingof
aco
ncep
tforade
man
d-ba
sedincrease
inthenu
mbe
rof
AirlineLiaisonOfficers(ALO
s)
Objective:
Toen
sure
that
fewer
fligh
tpa
ssen
gersreach
theSche
ngen
externalbo
rder
with
outfulfilling
theen
try
requ
iremen
ts(byway
oftheco
rrespo
ndingad
vance
controlsby
theALO
sat
theplaces
ofde
parture)
Lead
:ALO
Steerin
gBo
dy
Participation:
CPZH
31year
Redu
ctionin
thenu
mbe
rof
entryrefusalsof
fligh
tpa
ssen
gersfrom
airportswith
anALO
presen
ceIntersects
with
measure
1.1–
1–2(Third
Cou
ntrie
ssubp
roject):
3.5–
1–6:
Exam
inationof
the
possibility
oftheFO
Mde
le-
gatin
gremovalau
thority
tothebo
rder
controlage
ncies
Exam
inationof
ach
ange
inthelegislativeba
sisto
allow
theFO
Mto
authorisethebo
rder
controlage
nciesto
issueajustified
andap
pealab
leorde
rag
ainstpe
rson
sto
beremoved
Lead
:FO
M
Participation:
SBG,
CPBE
,CPGE,
CPSO
,CPVS,
CPZH
21year
Decisionon
theba
sisof
thestud
y
Ifthestud
yproves
positive:
Possibility
oftheFO
Mde
lega
tingremovalau
thority
tothebo
rder
controlage
ncies
–
34Themeasure
number
iscomprisedofthefilter
number
asper
thefour-filter
model(firstposition),thenumber
oftheproblemarea
withinthefilter
(secondposition),
thenumber
oftheindividualobjectivewithintheproblemarea
(thirdposition)andthenumber
ofthemeasure
withintheindividualobjective(fourthposition)
35Indicates
thestartofimplementation,cf.Section6.2
45
5.4.3 FindingsMeasures 3.1–3–1 (Coordination of procurementprocesses in the field of border control), 3.4–1–1(Participation of airport owners in the costs ofborder control and legal basis for airport categories)and 3.5–1–1 (General concept for the utilisationof flight passenger data) stand out as the mostimportant measures in this subproject on accountof their financial and operational scope.
Some measures cover several individual objectives atonce. For example, measure 3.1–1–1 (Mutual auditof the Schengen external border airports / bordercontrols) simultaneously covers both objective 3.1–1(Simplification of best practices) and 3.2–1 (Exchangeof information among the border control agenciesat national level).
Following thorough consideration by the agenciesinvolved, it was decided not to take any measuresregarding individual objective 3.2–3 from the strategy(Official internships and exchange programmes arepromoted between the border control agencies).Internships and exchange programmes tend to tieup a relatively high level of resources, as the exchangestaff often lack sufficient know-how about the localsystems and processes to be deployed to the sameextent as full members of staff. They therefore requireintensive supervision. Moreover, the border controlagencies already run internships as part of FRONTEX,with exchanges with European border control agen-cies. There are also already exchange programmesamong the Swiss border control agencies in certainspecialised areas (e.g. document inspection). Giventhe relatively high expense involved in increasingsuch resource-intensive activities, compared with theexpected return, the border control agencies havedecided not to formulate institutionalised measuresin this respect.
The Swiss border control landscape is characterisedby one federal and five cantonal border control agen-cies. Most measures strive towards improved cooper-ation between these agencies. However, many ofthese conflict with efforts to prevent a further increasein resources spent on border control. This forms thegreatest risk to implementation of the measures.
Some measures intersect with other subprojects(International Cooperation, General), particularlyin the cooperation with airlines (exchange of flightpassenger data, entry facilitation, regular contact).
Furthermore, some measures, such as 3.4–1–2 (Exami-nation of abolishing the exemption regime for non-Schengen flights at Category D airports), serve merelyto launch a working group to examine a specificobjective. The reasoning behind this often lies inthe need to include different players to specify theseconcepts, for which there was not enough timeduring the subproject work.
Finally, it should be noted that the impact of mostmeasures on illegal immigration, international crimeand people smuggling can rarely be measured. Fora start, there are very few current figures availablefor many factors, and what’s more, there are toomany other factors influencing these phenomena.As a result, only vague conclusions can be drawnon the impact of the measures.
5.4.4 Financial impactsThe outstanding measures under the Border sub-project incur non-recurrent expenses of an esti-mated CHF 3 million in material costs and around400 man-days, both of which are shared evenlybetween the federal and cantonal agencies. Thereare no expected non-recurrent savings.
The forecast annual recurrent expenses andsavings are as follows: Expenses of some CHF1 million in material costs and around 50 man-daysare offset by savings of some CHF 2 million in ma-terial costs and around 2100 man-days. While theseexpenses are mainly borne by the Confederation,the savings are primarily enjoyed by the cantons.
46
Regarding these amounts, it should be noted thata small number of measures account for the bulk ofexpenses and savings. Most of the expenses are in-curred by measure 3.5–1–2 (Automated border controlat airports). The savings are predominantly made bymeasures 3.4–1–1 (Participation of airport ownersin the border control costs and legal basis for airportcategories) and 3.5–1–2 (Automated border controlat airports).
5.4.5 SummaryThe measures formulated in the “Border” subprojectcover the entire scope of border control at Switzer-land’s Schengen external borders.
The federal structure calls for a high degree of coordi-nation, with six different border control agencies (onefederal agency and five cantonal agencies) coveringthe 12 airports with external borders. The trainingmaterial for border control officers is thus streamlined,and national and international exchange is institution-alised. In addition, the quality of border control willbe constantly checked in the future, which will proveespecially beneficial in the Schengen evaluationsby the EU. Moreover, a range of process optimisationtechniques will raise the efficiency of cooperationbetween the players involved in various fields (e.g.procurement).
In the identification of flight passengers, variousmeasures ensure a faster and smoother border con-trol experience for legitimate travellers (e.g. touristsor business travellers); meanwhile, illegal immigrantscan more easily be detected as such and detainedat an earlier stage.
Finally, one measure ensures a fairer allocation of infra-structure costs through the inclusion of airport ope-rators in the financing of border control operations.
47
5.5 “Internal” subproject
5.5.1 OverviewThe ”Internal“ subproject covers measures withinthe Schengen Area and addresses nine individualobjectives in the following problem areas:• Insufficient networking at an operational level
(P2.3)• Uneven distribution of enforcement costs creates
false incentives (P4.2)• Discrepancies in practices and weaknesses in
the areas of forgery detection, investigation,prosecution and enforcement (coercive measures/removal) (P4.3)
• Insufficient prevention of people smuggling (P0.3)
All of these problem areas indicate the potential thatlies in taking a nationwide approach to preventingillegal immigration and people smuggling.
Regarding the first problem area, objective 2.3–2 callsfor an improved exchange of information amongthe national police bodies and between these andtheir European police counterparts in the field ofillegal immigration. This institutionalises cooperationwith police bodies in the Schengen Area and securesthe information exchange that is so important forpreventing illegal immigration.
36 Individual objectives 4.2–1, 4.2–2, 4.2–3 and 4.3–137 Individual objective 4.2–4
Other individual objectives36 seek to guide migrationpolicy toward long-term interests and to harmoniseenforcement practices. The uneven distribution ofenforcement costs frustrates the creation of a uniformand thus also an effective removal practice. Cost com-pensation instruments and incentive mechanisms aswell as supracantonal centres of expertise37 shouldprovide support in this respect. More consistencyin the prosecution of people smugglers also calls fora smaller number of interfaces, which is what ob-jective 4.3–2 seeks to achieve.
As shown with objective 4.3–5, the successful pre-vention of people smuggling also requires moretargeted training and greater awareness amongthose involved. Cases of people smuggling must beprosecuted more consistently in general (individualobjective 0.3–2).
The measures formulated to meet the above individualobjectives are listed in the following table.
48
38Themeasure
number
iscomprisedofthefilter
number
asper
thefour-filter
model(firstposition),thenumber
oftheproblemarea
withinthefilter
(secondposition),
thenumber
oftheindividualobjectivewithintheproblemarea
(thirdposition)andthenumber
ofthemeasure
withintheindividualobjective(fourthposition)
39Indicates
thestartofimplementation,cf.Section6.2
Mea
sure
38Ex
planation
Responsibility
Rea
lisation
phase3
9
Duration
Indicators
Commen
ts
4.2–
2–1:
Mecha
nism
sto
redis-
tributetheen
forcem
entcosts
inrelatio
nto
immigratio
nan
dasylum
(feasibilitystud
y)
Stud
yto
presen
tthediscrepa
ncies
that
curren
tlyexistin
theen
forcem
ent
costsin
immigratio
nan
dasylum
aswellasexam
inationof
vario
uscost
compe
nsationinstrumen
tsan
dincen-
tivemecha
nism
s
Lead
:FO
M
Participation:
Can
tons
11year
Com
pletionof
feasibility
stud
yTh
ismeasure
simultane
ouslycovers
individu
alob
jectives
4.2–
1to
4.2–
3
4.2–
4–1:
Cen
treof
expe
rtise
forprocessing
immigratio
ncasesfrom
railtraffic
throug
hapilotprojectin
Bern
(feasi-
bilitystud
y)
Stud
yto
exam
inethepo
ssibilitie
san
dworkou
tapilotprojectforan
oper-
ationa
lcen
treof
expe
rtisein
theCity
ofBe
rnfortheproc
essing
ofcanton
alan
dsupracan
tona
limmigratio
ncases
Lead
:EM
Fof
theCity
ofBe
rn,
SBG
Participation:
FOM
21year
Com
pletionof
feasibility
stud
y
Evalua
tionof
thestud
yprod
uces
ade
cision
onwhe
ther
toim
plem
entapilotprojectin
Bern
Theinform
ationreferssolelyto
the
stud
y.Th
iswilliden
tifythecosts,
saving
s,preciserespon
sibilitiesan
dthetim
ingof
anysuch
implem
enta-
tion.
Itwillalso
provideinform
ation
onthepo
ssible
need
fororga
nisa-
tiona
lorinstitu
tiona
ladjustm
ent
4.3–
1–1:
Listof
prob
lem
States
with
rega
rdto
enforce-
men
t
Creationan
dup
datin
gof
aliston
coop
erationwith
coun
triesof
origin
inthesuba
reas
of“Ide
ntificatio
n”,
“Issue
oftraveldo
cumen
ts”an
d“E
xecutio
nof
specialfl
ights”
asa
basisforha
rmon
isingmigratio
nfor-
eign
policywith
respectto
returns
Lead
:FO
M0
Perm
anen
tHighe
rnu
mbe
rof
depa
rtures
(measuredusing
depa
rturestatistics)
Thismeasure
hasalread
ybe
enim
ple-
men
ted(based
onaFede
ralC
ouncil
decision
of15
June
2012
)and
form
stheba
sisformeasure
4.3–
1–2
4.3–
1–2:
Inclusionof
thelist
ofpriorityreturn
coun
triesin
the“Interna
tiona
lMigratio
nCoo
peratio
n”structure
Add
ition
ofthelistof
priorityreturn
coun
tries(cf.mea
sure
4.3–
1–1)
tothe
“Interna
tiona
lMigratio
nCoo
peratio
n”structure.
Lead
:FO
M
Participation:
SDC,D
PA,S
ECO,
occasion
alinclusion
ofothe
rag
encies
asne
cessary
0Perm
anen
tGreater
willingn
essam
ongtheStates
inqu
estio
nto
coop
eratewith
Switzerland
inha
ndingover
theirow
ncitizen
s
Dep
ende
nton
measure
4.3–
1–1
5.5.2Mea
sures
49
38Themeasure
number
iscomprisedofthefilter
number
asper
thefour-filter
model(firstposition),thenumber
oftheproblemarea
withinthefilter
(secondposition),
thenumber
oftheindividualobjectivewithintheproblemarea
(thirdposition)andthenumber
ofthemeasure
withintheindividualobjective(fourthposition)
39Indicates
thestartofimplementation,cf.Section6.2
40NAA:N
ewresidentpermitforforeigners,RE3:Realisationphase3oftheproject
Mea
sure
38Ex
planation
Responsibility
Rea
lisation
phase3
9
Duration
Indicators
Commen
ts
4.3–
4–1:
Biom
etric
reside
nce
perm
its(study)
Replacem
entof
theexistin
gpa
per
perm
itsby
cred
it-card-sized
IDswith
better
forgeryprotectio
n
Clarifi
catio
nof
thepo
ssibility
ofad
ding
biom
etric
data
totheresi-
dencepe
rmits
ofEU
/EFTAcitizen
san
dthene
edto
doso
Lead
:FO
M,V
KM
Participation:
SBG,fed
pol,occasion
alinclusionof
othe
rag
en-
cies
asne
cessary
03years
Stud
yor
projectresults
areavailable
Incase
ofintrod
uctio
nof
thebiom
etric
reside
nce
perm
it:Re
ductionin
thenu
mbe
rof
forged
reside
nce
perm
its(targe
t:nu
mbe
rof
forgeriesin
relatio
nto
thetotaln
umbe
rof
arou
ndon
emillionisno
greaterthan
60)
Measure
with
inthescop
eof
theexistin
gprojectNAARE
340
4.3–
5–1:
Training
inthepre-
ventionof
qualified
peop
lesm
ugglingat
theSw
issPo
lice
Institu
te(SPI)a
swellasaw
are-
ness
andinform
ationa
levents
andmaterials
Training
andraisingaw
aren
esswith
intheag
encies
involved
inpreven
ting
qualified
peop
lesm
uggling
Lead
:fedp
ol,K
KPK
S,SPI
Participation:
Allfede
ral,canton
alan
dlocalage
nciesinvolved
inpreven
tingpe
ople
smug
gling
1Perm
anen
tCou
rses
onqu
alified
peop
lesm
ugglingofferedin
Fren
chan
dGerman
attheSPI
Organ
isationof
internaltraining
coursesab
out
qualified
peop
lesm
ugglingby
thepo
liceforces
andtheSB
G
Inform
ationa
land
awaren
ess-raisingeffortsfor
othe
rag
encies
Dep
ende
nton
measures0.3–
2–1
and0.3–
2–3
0.3–
2–1:
Clear
assign
men
tof
investigations
inthefie
ldof
qualified
peop
lesm
uggling
Explicitassign
men
tof
investigative
authority
inthecanton
sin
thefie
ldof
qualified
peop
lesm
uggling
Reco
mmen
datio
nby
theKKPK
S/KKJPD
onassign
men
tto
thecrim
inal
investi-
gatio
npo
lice
Lead
:Can
tona
linvestig
ative
agen
cies
Participation:
KKPK
S/KKJPD
11year
Clear
assign
men
tof
respon
sibility(in
vestigative
authority)w
ithin
thecanton
sto
anorga
nisatio
nal
unitwith
crim
inalinvestigativeresources
Recommen
datio
nby
theKKPK
S/K
KJPDha
sbe
enmad
ean
dim
plem
ented
Impa
cton
measures0.3–
2–2
and0.3–
2–3
0.3–
2–2:
App
ointmen
tof
specialists
with
inthepo
lice
andprosecutingau
thorities
inthefie
ldof
qualified
peop
lesm
uggling
Explicitap
pointm
entan
dtraining
ofspecialists
forpreven
tingqu
alified
peop
lesm
ugglingam
ongthecanton
alinvestigativeag
encies
andprosecution
authorities
Lead
:Can
tona
linvestig
ative
agen
cies
andprosecution
authorities
Participation:
KKPK
S/K
KJPD/K
SBS
11year
Specialists
appo
intedan
dtraine
dby
thecompe
tent
investigativeag
ency
andprosecutionau
thority
Recommen
datio
nby
theKKPK
S/KKJPD/KSB
Sha
sbe
enmad
ean
dim
plem
ented
Dep
ende
nton
measure
0.3–
2–1
5.5.2Mea
sures
50
Mea
sure
38Ex
planation
Responsibility
Rea
lisation
phase3
9
Duration
Indicators
Commen
ts
0.3–
2–3:
App
ointmen
tof
in-
vestigativegrou
psin
thefie
ldof
qualified
peop
lesm
uggling
App
ointmen
tof
servicegrou
pswith
intheinvestigativeag
ency
defin
edin
measure
0.3–
2–1forinvestigations
incasesof
qualified
peop
lesm
uggling,
requ
iring
compreh
ensive
investigations
Lead
:Can
tona
linvestig
ative
agen
cies
Participation:
KKPK
S/KKJPD
11year
Servicegrou
psap
pointedwith
inthecanton
alinvestigativeag
encies
Recommen
datio
nby
theKKPK
S/K
KJPDha
sbe
enmad
ean
dim
plem
ented
Dep
ende
nton
measure
0.3–
2–1
0.3–
2–4:
Optionof
assign
ing
fede
ralautho
rityin
prosecu-
tionof
qualified
peop
lesm
ug-
gling(study)
Stud
yof
theop
tionof
assign
ing
fede
ralautho
rity(w
iththeexplicit
approvalof
thecanton
sinvolved
)to
bringprosecutions
inrelatio
nto
qualified
peop
lesm
ugglingeven
with
outthepresen
ceof
acrim
inal
orga
nisatio
n,as
requ
iredun
derthe
SwissPe
nalC
ode
Lead
:FO
J
Participation:
Office
oftheAttorne
yGen
eral,fed
pol,KKPK
S,SSK
0Perm
anen
tStud
yor
projectresults
areavailable.
Dep
ending
onthestud
yor
projectresults:
Legislativean
dcontractua
lprecond
ition
sexist
fortheop
tionof
assign
ingfede
ralautho
rity
Thismeasure
willbe
addressedan
dexam
ined
with
inthefram
eworkof
aworking
grou
pap
pointedby
the
KKJPD.Itconcerns,interalia,coo
pe-
ratio
nbe
tweenthecompe
tent
autho-
rities.Alsoinvolved
inan
othe
rFO
J-led
working
grou
pthat
exam
ines
any
amen
dmen
tsto
fede
rallaw
0.3–
2–5:
Con
sisten
tutilisatio
nof
investigativeinform
ationin
relatio
nto
qualified
peop
lesm
uggling
Optim
isationof
coop
erationin
relatio
nto
qualified
peop
lesm
ugglingbe
tween
theSB
Gan
dthecanton
alinvestigative
agen
cies
throug
hmasterprocesses
andstan
dardised
agreem
ents
Lead
:SB
G,c
antona
linvestig
a-tiveau
thorities
Participation:
KKPK
S
1Perm
anen
tCom
pilatio
nof
masterprocessesan
dcompletion
ofstan
dardised
agreem
ents
Increase
inthenu
mbe
rof
peop
lesm
ugglingcases
takenon
bythecanton
alinvestigativeau
thorities
Greater
availabilityof
inform
ationon
peop
lesm
ug-
glingforop
erationa
lcrim
inalan
alysis
–
0.3–
2–6:
Obtaining
inform
a-tio
non
peop
lesm
ugglingin
thefirstasylum
interview
Expa
nsionof
thefirstinterview
with
asylum
seekers(aspa
rtof
atestop
e-ratio
nin
Zurich)
toob
tain
inform
ation
onpe
ople
smug
glers,includ
ingthe
system
aticusean
ddissem
inationof
theinform
ationob
tained
Lead
:FO
M
Participation:
SBG,fed
pol,canton
alan
dmun
icipalpo
lice
12years
Regu
lar,specifican
dap
prop
riatelyad
dressed
forw
arding
ofinform
ationob
tained
from
asylum
seekerson
peop
lesm
ugglingto
the
compe
tent
policeau
thorities
Thismeasure
requ
iresfurthe
rclarificatio
n,espe
ciallyrega
rding
data
evalua
tionan
dan
ylegislativeam
endm
ents
5.5.2Mea
sures
38Themeasure
number
iscomprisedofthefilter
number
asper
thefour-filter
model(firstposition),thenumber
oftheproblemarea
withinthefilter
(secondposition),
thenumber
oftheindividualobjectivewithintheproblemarea
(thirdposition)andthenumber
ofthemeasure
withintheindividualobjective(fourthposition)
39Indicates
thestartofimplementation,cf.Section6.2
51
5.5.3 FindingsA total of seven measures41 were formulated on themore comprehensive prevention of people smug-gling. These focus on ensuring a more efficient pros-ecution and simplified interagency investigations bydefining clearer responsibilities, without encroachingon the cantons’ sphere of competency. Of particularimportance for extensive investigations is measure0.3–2–4: the option of assigning federal authoritywould enable the cantons – if they wish – to leavecriminal proceedings in cases of qualified peoplesmuggling to the Confederation, even if these casesdo not meet the requirement for being classified asorganised crime. This would remove some of the bur-den from those cantons agreeing to this and wouldsimplify and improve the efficiency of prosecution insuch cases, which are often intercantonal. The workon this measure is conducted within the context oftwo working groups established by a KKJPD mandatewith all of the stakeholders involved. Two significantmilestones have been reached to date: First, a frame-work agreement was signed in November 2013 be-tween the FDJP and the KKJPD to promote and sup-port increased and better coordinated cooperationbetween the Federal Criminal Police (FCP) and thecantonal and municipal police forces. Secondly, theOffice of the Attorney General and the Conferenceof Law Enforcement Authorities of Switzerland (KSBS,now SSK) signed in November 2013 a joint recom-mendation on cooperation in the prosecution of com-plex crimes, particularly human trafficking. This rec-ommendation serves to improve coordination andintensify mutual support and information betweenthe cantonal prosecution authorities and the Officeof the Attorney General. The other measures in rela-tion to people smuggling seek to obtain more infor-mation on this phenomenon as well as more targetedtraining and raising of awareness among all agenciesinvolved.
Another key measure of the ”Internal“ subprojectinvolves a feasibility study on the pilot operation ofa centre of expertise for processing cases of illegalimmigration in Bern (measure 4.2–4–1). This exam-ines whether and to what extent an interagency pro-cessing centre can help to optimise cooperation. Thecentre is jointly operated by the SBG and the EMF ofthe City of Bern. Cases of illegal residence discoveredby the SBG in rail traffic are transferred to the police;detention pending deportation under immigrationlaw is ordered and travel documents obtained. Basedon practical experience and service requirements, aswell as its geotactical situation and close cooperationbetween the agencies involved, the City of Bern issuitable for such a pilot project. The study will alsoprovide information on further issues.
The measures already implemented are those in thearea of enforcement: 4.3–1–1 (List of problemStates for enforcement) and 4.3–1–2 (Inclusion of thelist of priority return countries in the “InternationalMigration Cooperation” structure), developed onthe basis of a Federal Council decision of June 2012.These instruments will improve cooperation withcountries of origin in relation to returns and thusallow for a long-term, consistent enforcement policy.
No measures were formulated regarding objective2.3–242 as the agencies represented in the sub-project believed that this goal could be met withinthe framework of the existing cooperation andthus without any concrete measures. Likewise, nomeasures were formulated for objective 4.3–2.43
Based on their experience, particularly in operations,the agencies involved in this subproject agreedthat the existing difficulties in cooperation werenot due to interface problems.
Implementation of the measures is at all threegovernment levels. This includes stakeholderswith a wide variety of interests and different oper-ational or strategic orientations, a fact likely tofurther complicate implementation of the measures.
41 Measures 0.3–2–1 to 0.3–2–6 as well as 4.3–5–142 National police conferences regularly exchange findings with other police conferences, particularly those from neighbouring countries,
on the prevention of illegal immigration and people smuggling43 Overlapping in enforcement is minimised; any remaining areas of redundancy do not hinder enforcement
52
5.5.4 Financial impactsThe primary requirement for implementation ofthe measures within the ”Internal“ subproject ispersonnel resources.
The majority of measures in relation to people smug-gling result first and foremost in organisationalchanges. They thus incur only minor personnel orother expenses. However, measures 0.3–2–4 (Optionof assigning federal authority in prosecution of quali-fied human trafficking [study]) and 0.3–2–6 (Obtain-ing information on people smuggling in the first asy-lum interview) could result in substantial personnelcosts for the Confederation in the area of prosecutionand the evaluation of information. The precise calcu-lation of these costs, as well as any allocation thereof,will be clarified as part of the implementation work,insofar as this is possible.
The costintensive measure 4.3–4–1 (Biometric resi-dence permits [study]) already forms part of a sepa-rate project structure.44 The expenses at federaland cantonal level therefore fall outside the scopeof this action plan.
The study costs for measure 4.2–4–1 (Centre of exper-tise for processing immigration cases from rail trafficthrough a pilot project in Bern [feasibility study]) willbe borne by the two lead agencies (SBG and EMFof the City of Bern) and are estimated at around 50man-days each. The study will provide informationon any operating costs for running such a centreof expertise.
The financial impact of redistributing the differentenforcement costs will be shown by measure 4.2–2–1(Mechanisms to redistribute the enforcement costsin relation to immigration and asylum).
5.5.5 SummaryThe measures in the ”Internal“ subproject result pri-marily in a more efficient prevention of people smug-gling. This is done by clearly designating the compe-tencies, obtaining more detailed information aboutthe phenomenon, and raising awareness amongthe agencies concerned. Failures in relation to enforce-ment are targeted within the pilot project on aninteragency centre of expertise. Moreover, a studyof the different enforcement costs should indicatepossible mechanisms for cost compensation. Success-ful prevention of illegal immigration is also achievedby issuing residence permits that, through technicalinnovations, offer greater security against forgeries.
44 NAA RE3, a project between the FOM and the VKM
53
5.6 “General” subproject
5.6.1 OverviewThe title of the “General” subproject indicatesthe wide range and heterogeneity of the individualobjectives covered. This subproject covers all individ-ual objectives that, on account of their cross-cuttingnature, could not be clearly assigned to one of theother four filters. The starting point was formed bythe following problem areas:• Inadequate gathering, dissemination and/or use
of information available on site (P1.1)• Individuals reach the external border who do not
fulfil the entry requirements and should not beallowed to travel (P1.2)
• Inadequate exchange of information andinsufficient networking (P4.1)
• Enforcement is circumvented by individuals whoevade immediate removal by submitting a futileasylum application (P4.4)
• Lack of information and analysis (P0.1)• Inadequate exchange of information between
the levels of operations and strategic policy (P0.2)• Insufficient prevention of people smuggling (P0.3)
The strategy defines 18 individual objectives for theseproblem areas, divided into four subject areas:
The largest group of individual objectives (with 11)is that of “Information flow and analysis”. Thisgroup covers all individual objectives that relate tothe generation of raw data, the interagency andcircular flow of information, and the comprehensivestrategic analysis regarding immigration (particularlywhen illegal).
The “Systemic” group of individual objectives con-tains those that seek to ensure better utilisation ofexisting systems and processes. All of the relevantdatabases that could potentially be queried in thecourse of a typical migration process (particularlyin the case of illegal immigration) are systematicallyused. There should also be a systematic matchingof personal data based on the necessary legal andtechnical foundations.
Another group deals with individual objectives relatedto the asylum procedure (“Asylum” group of individ-ual objectives), striving mainly to accelerate the pro-cesses. As numerous measures have already beendrawn up under the FOM’s lead independently ofthis action plan (particularly with regard to speedingup the procedures), some of which are already beingimplemented, these are simply outlined here in theaction plan.
Finally, independent objectives were defined in relationto “Cooperation at the external border”, whichseeks to reduce the number of persons reachingthe Schengen external border who do not have therequired entry requirements (i.e. INAD: inadmissible).
The following table presents 23 measures that havebeen formulated to attain the individual objectives.
54
45Themeasure
number
iscomprisedofthefilter
number
asper
thefour-filter
model(firstposition),thenumber
oftheproblemarea
withinthefilter
(secondposition),
thenumber
oftheindividualobjectivewithintheproblemarea
(thirdposition)andthenumber
ofthemeasure
withintheindividualobjective(fourthposition)
46Indicates
thestartofimplementation,cf.Section6.2
Mea
sure
45Ex
planation
Responsibility
Rea
lisation
phase4
6
Duration
Indicators
Commen
ts
1.2–
1–1:
Carrie
rsanctio
nsIm
positio
nof
dissua
sive,e
ffectivean
dap
prop
riate
sanctio
nsag
ainstairline
carriersthat
failto
perform
theirdu
-tie
sof
diligen
ceas
perArt.9
2FN
A
Lead
:FO
M0
Perm
anen
t20
%redu
ctionin
thenu
mbe
rof
entryrefusals
onaccoun
tof
notha
ving
avisa
(adjustedforthe
increase
in[non
-Schen
gen]
passen
gernu
mbe
rs)
with
inthefirst
fiveyears
–
1.2–
1–2:
New
web
site
with
Sche
ngen
entryrequ
iremen
tsCreationof
acitizen
-frie
ndlyweb
site,
preferab
lyinteractive,
ontheSche
n-ge
nen
tryrequ
iremen
ts,tosupp
le-
men
ttheexistin
gdirectives
aimed
atamorespecialistread
ership
Lead
:FO
M
Participation:
GS-FD
JP(CCWeb
),CD
3Perm
anen
t20
%redu
ctionin
thenu
mbe
rof
entryrefusals
onaccoun
tof
notha
ving
avisa
(adjustedforthe
increase
in[non
-Schen
gen]
passen
gernu
mbe
rs)
with
inthefirst
fiveyears
–
1.2–
2–1:
Coo
peratio
nag
reem
entswith
airline
sDraftingof
aco
ncep
tpa
peron
coop
erationbe
twee
ntheFO
M,
border
controlage
nciesan
dairline
s,includ
ingthecorrespo
ndingstan
dard
MoU
Con
clusionof
coop
erationag
ree-
men
tswith
thelead
ingairline
s
Lead
:FO
M
Participation:
Airlines,C
PBE
,CPGE,
CPSO
,CPVS,
CPZH
2Perm
anen
tIncrease
inthenu
mbe
rof
airline
swith
which
Switzerland
conclude
saco
operationag
reem
ent
(based
onastan
dard
MoU
)
–
4.1–
2–1:
Training
andpe
riodic
retraining
ofZE
MISusers
Add
ition
ofco
nten
ton
thede
pend
-en
cies
ofZEMISwith
othe
rsystem
sto
allZEM
IStraining
andfurthe
red
ucationco
urses
Acq
uisitio
nof
aZEMISe-learning
tool
Activeprom
otionof
ZEMISco
urses
specially
oriented
towards
thestaffof
policeop
erations
centresan
dforeign
natio
nalservices
Lead
:FO
M1
Perm
anen
tDeclinein
thenu
mbe
rof
fusion
applications
inZEMIS
with
intw
oyears
Thismeasure
also
covers
individu
alob
jective4.3–
3
5.6.2Mea
sures
55
Mea
sure
45Ex
planation
Responsibility
Rea
lisation
phase4
6
Duration
Indicators
Commen
ts
4.1–
2–2:
Expa
nsion
ofZEMISaccess
rights
Ada
ptationof
unde
rlyinglegislation
soas
toa)
gran
tcanton
alan
dmun
icipalpo
lice
forces,the
SBG,m
igratio
noffices
andtheFISaccess
tothefacial
imag
esco
ntaine
din
ZEMIS,a
ndb)
gran
ttheSIRE
NEoffic
e(fed
pol)
access
tothee-do
ssiersattached
inZE
MIS
Lead
:FO
M3
3years
Detectio
nof
over
ado
zencasesof
misuseeach
year
throug
hthesystem
aticverifi
catio
nof
iden
titiesthat
aremaintaine
dthou
ghno
tproven
byforeignna
tiona
lsby
means
ofthefacial
imag
esstored
inZEMIS
–
4.1–
2–3:
Dep
loym
entof
e-do
cread
ersat
migratio
noffices
(pilotsche
me)
Dep
loym
entof
devicesforread
ing
andch
ecking
inform
ation(i.e.
visual
imag
ean
dpe
rson
alde
tails)from
e-do
cumen
ts(i.e.
biom
etric
passpo
rts
andreside
ncepe
rmits)a
swellasau
to-
maticch
ecking
ofcertainsecu
rity
features
ofe-do
cumen
tsforkn
own
indicatio
nsof
forgery(pilo
tsche
me)
Lead
:EM
Fof
theCity
ofBe
rn1
1year
Dep
loym
entof
threeread
ingde
vicesover
sixmon
ths
Existenceof
afin
alrepo
rtthreemon
thsafter
completionof
thepilotsche
me
Con
tributionmad
eby
theha
rdwarean
dsoftware
used
inthepilotsche
meto
detect
misuse/illeg
alim
migratio
n
Thismeasure
also
covers
individu
alob
jective4.3–
4
4.1–
2–4:
Use
ofexistin
ge-do
cread
ersat
represen
ta-
tions
abroad
(pilotsche
me)
Dep
loym
entof
devicesalread
yexistin
gbu
tlargelyun
used
atrepresen
tatio
nsab
road
forread
ingan
dch
ecking
infor-
mation(i.e.
visual
imag
ean
dpe
rson
alde
tails)from
e-do
cumen
ts(i.e.
biom
et-
ricpa
sspo
rtsan
dreside
ncepe
rmits)a
swella
sau
tomaticch
ecking
ofcertain
secu
rityfeatures
ofe-do
cumen
tsfor
know
nindicatio
nsof
forgery
Lead
:FD
FA2
1year
Dep
loym
entof
read
ingde
vicesat
three
represen
tatio
ns
Existenceof
afin
alrepo
rtthreemon
thsafter
completionof
thepilotsche
me
Con
tributionmad
eby
theha
rdwarean
dsoftware
used
inthepilotsche
meto
detect
misuse/illeg
alim
migratio
n
Dep
ende
nton
measure
4.1–
2–5.
Theoverallb
iometrics
strategy
shou
ldindicate
whe
ther
orno
tapilotsche
mewillbe
laun
ched
4.1–
2–5:
Overallbiom
etrics
strategy
Form
ulationof
ana
tiona
lbiometrics
strategy
tobe
subm
itted
totheFede
r-alCou
ncil.Key
issues:B
iometrics
compe
tencywith
intheCon
fede
ratio
n,verifi
catio
nof
existin
gbiom
etrics
documen
ts,increasingde
man
dson
thee-do
cumen
tsystem
platform
,etc.
Lead
:TechnicalC
ommittee
for
IDDocum
ents
Participation:
FOBL,FOM,S
BG,fed
pol,
CPZH
,CD,K
KPK
S,SV
ZW,V
KM
11year
Existenceof
astrategy
Ackno
wledg
men
tof
thestrategy
bytheFede
ral
Cou
ncil
Avo
idan
ceof
unne
cessarysystem
costs
Improvem
entin
thequ
ality
ofda
tarelated
toim
migratio
nan
dasylum
law
–
5.6.2Mea
sures
45Themeasure
number
iscomprisedofthefilter
number
asper
thefour-filter
model(firstposition),thenumber
oftheproblemarea
withinthefilter
(secondposition),
thenumber
oftheindividualobjectivewithintheproblemarea
(thirdposition)andthenumber
ofthemeasure
withintheindividualobjective(fourthposition)
46Indicates
thestartofimplementation,cf.Section6.2
56
45Themeasure
number
iscomprisedofthefilter
number
asper
thefour-filter
model(firstposition),thenumber
oftheproblemarea
withinthefilter
(secondposition),
thenumber
oftheindividualobjectivewithintheproblemarea
(thirdposition)andthenumber
ofthemeasure
withintheindividualobjective(fourthposition)
46Indicates
thestartofimplementation,cf.Section6.2
Mea
sure
45Ex
planation
Responsibility
Rea
lisation
phase4
6
Duration
Indicators
Commen
ts
4.1–
2–6:
Add
ition
ofa
“PCNnu
mbe
r”search
box
inRIPO
L(feasibilitystud
y)
Feasibility
stud
yon
whe
ther
and
unde
rwha
tcond
ition
sRIPO
Lcould
begivenane
w(searcha
ble)
field
foren
terin
gthePC
N
Lead
:fedp
ol
Participation:
FOM,ISC
-FDJP
21year
Writtenrepo
rtthat
commen
tson
thefeasibility
ofasearchab
lefie
ldforPC
Nnu
mbe
rsor
compa
rable
measuresan
dillustrates
thelega
l,technicaland
operationa
lcon
ditio
nsun
derwhich
thismeasure
canbe
realised
Theinform
ationreferssolelyto
the
stud
y.Th
iswillmakestatem
ents
oncosts,saving
s,preciserespon
sibilities
andthetim
ingof
anysuch
implem
en-
tatio
n
4.1–
2–8:
Simplified
ISR
queries(feasibilitystud
y)Feasibility
stud
yon
adap
tingthe
tech
nicala
ndpo
ssiblythelega
lbasis
toen
ablepo
licean
dbo
rder
control
bodies
toqu
eryISRforiden
tificatio
npu
rposes
basedon
lyon
thelast
and
firstna
mes
andda
teof
birth
Lead
:FO
M
Participation:
SBG,fed
pol,ISC-FDJP,
CPBE
,CPGE,
CPSO
,CPVS,
CPZH
,KKPK
S
11year
Writtenrepo
rtthat
commen
tson
thefeasibility
ofad
aptin
gISRan
dillustrates
thelega
l,technical
andop
erationa
lcon
ditio
nsun
derwhich
this
measure
canbe
realised
Theinform
ationreferssolelyto
the
stud
y.Th
iswillmakestatem
ents
oncosts,saving
s,preciserespon
sibilities
andthetim
ingof
anysuch
implem
en-
tatio
n
4.1–
2–9:
Simplified
ISA
queries
Ada
ptationof
thetechnicaland
lega
lba
sisto
enab
lepo
licean
dbo
rder
controlb
odiesto
queryISAforiden
ti-ficationpu
rposes
basedon
lyon
the
lastan
dfirst
names
andda
teof
birth
Lead
:fedp
ol
Participation:
SBG,
CPBE
,CPGE,
CPSO
,CPVS,
CPZH
,KKPK
S
02years
Possibility
fortheSB
Gan
dthede
sign
ated
canton
alan
dmun
icipalpo
liceforces
toqu
eryISAforiden
ti-ficationpu
rposes
basedon
lyon
thelastan
dfirst
names
andtheda
teof
birth
Thismeasure
hasalread
ypa
rtially
been
implem
entedthroug
hthe
passingof
theGeissbü
hler
Motion
(10.39
17)b
ytheParliam
ent.
Nofurthe
rstep
sareplan
nedfor
thetim
ebe
ing
4.1–
3–1:
CS-VIS
asylum
Com
parison
ofasylum
seekers’fin
ger-
prints
(EURO
DAC)w
ithfin
gerprin
tsstored
inCS-VIS
forthepu
rposeof
iden
tifying
undo
cumen
tedasylum
seekersan
dpo
ssiblyinitiatingDUBLIN-
OUTproced
ures
Lead
:FO
M
Participation:
ISC-FDJP
0Perm
anen
tTh
eCS-VISasylum
projectwas
com-
pleted
in20
12an
den
teredinto
ope-
ratio
nat
thestartof
2013
5.6.2Mea
sures
57
Mea
sure
45Ex
planation
Responsibility
Rea
lisation
phase4
6
Duration
Indicators
Commen
ts
4.1–
3–2:
Inclusionof
fedp
olin
VISIONconsultatio
n(feasi-
bilitystud
y)
Feasibility
stud
yon
whe
ther
andho
wpo
liceinform
ationsystem
s(particularly
JANUSan
dIPAS)
couldbe
automati-
cally
queriedwith
intheVISIONvisa
consultatio
nproced
urean
dtherefore
removethecurren
tblindspot
inthe
securitypo
lice’sfin
ding
s
Lead
:fedp
ol
Participation:
FOM,ISC
-FDJP,FIS
01year
Writtenrepo
rtthat
commen
tson
thepo
ssible
optio
nsof
includ
ingpo
liceinform
ationsystem
sin
theVISIONconsultatio
nprocessan
devalua
tes
theseop
tions
from
alega
l,technical,fin
ancial
andop
erationa
laspect
Theinform
ationreferssolelyto
the
stud
y.Th
iswillmakestatem
ents
onco
sts,saving
s,preciserespon
sibilities
andthetim
ingof
anysuch
imple-
men
tatio
n
4.1–
3–3:
“Ide
ntificatio
n”clearin
gun
it(feasibilitystud
y)Feasibility
stud
yon
whe
ther
andho
wthevario
usda
taba
sesinvolved
inthe
migratio
nprocess(ORB
IS,V
IS,E
URO
-DAC,S
IS,Z
EMIS,R
IPOL,etc.)a
ndthe
finding
sprocessedin
thesecouldbe
better
aligne
dwith
each
othe
r
Lead
:FO
M,fed
pol
Participation:
FOJ,FD
PIC,S
BG,K
KPK
S,SV
ZW,V
KM,V
SAA
21year
Arepo
rtpa
ssed
byallo
fficesinvolved
that
contains
thepo
ssiblevaria
ntsof
aclearin
gun
itan
d/or
ane
wroleconcep
tan
dpresen
tsthelega
l,technical
andorga
nisatio
nalcon
ditio
nsun
derwhich
these
varia
ntscanbe
realised
Theinform
ationreferssolelyto
the
stud
y.Th
iswillmakestatem
ents
oncosts,saving
s,preciserespon
sibilities
andthetim
ingof
anysuch
implem
en-
tatio
n
4.4–
1–1:
Nosocial
bene
fits
inthecase
ofmultip
leasylum
applications
Norig
htto
social
bene
fitsforpe
rson
ssubm
ittingmorethan
oneasylum
application(onlyem
erge
ncyaidto
begran
ted)
Lead
:FO
M
Participation:
Can
tons
0Perm
anen
tRe
ductionin
theprop
ortio
nof
clearly
futile
multip
leasylum
applications
filed
–
4.4–
2–1:
Expe
ditedasylum
proced
ures
Implem
entatio
nof
anexpe
dited
asylum
proc
edure(48ho
urs)for
eligible
asylum
applications
(e.g.visa-
exem
ptEu
rope
ansafe
coun
triesor
othe
rco
untrieswith
alow
recogn
ition
rate
andfasten
forcem
entpo
ssibilitie
s)
Implem
entatio
nof
afast-track
proced
-ure(decisionwith
in20
days
durin
gstay
inan
RPC),whe
refasten
force-
men
tisno
tpo
ssible
Lead
:FO
M0
Perm
anen
tDissuasiveeffect
byshortening
theleng
thof
theproced
ure
Redu
ctionin
thenu
mbe
rof
asylum
seekers
from
theselected
states
–
5.6.2Mea
sures
45Themeasure
number
iscomprisedofthefilter
number
asper
thefour-filter
model(firstposition),thenumber
oftheproblemarea
withinthefilter
(secondposition),
thenumber
oftheindividualobjectivewithintheproblemarea
(thirdposition)andthenumber
ofthemeasure
withintheindividualobjective(fourthposition)
46Indicates
thestartofimplementation,cf.Section6.2
58
45Themeasure
number
iscomprisedofthefilter
number
asper
thefour-filter
model(firstposition),thenumber
oftheproblemarea
withinthefilter
(secondposition),
thenumber
oftheindividualobjectivewithintheproblemarea
(thirdposition)andthenumber
ofthemeasure
withintheindividualobjective(fourthposition)
46Indicates
thestartofimplementation,cf.Section6.2
Mea
sure
45Ex
planation
Responsibility
Rea
lisation
phase4
6
Duration
Indicators
Commen
ts
4.4–
3–1:
Entryba
nfor
expe
ditedasylum
proc
edures
Moreco
nsistent
impo
sitio
nof
entry
bans
inthecase
offailedexpe
dited
asylum
proced
ures,ifthede
parture
dead
lineexpires,thereisadisturba
nce
topu
blicorde
ror
security,or
inthe
case
ofun
substantiatedmultip
leap
pli-
catio
nsan
dclearcasesof
misuse
Lead
:FO
M
Participation:
Can
tons
0Perm
anen
tRe
ductionin
thenu
mbe
rof
futilemultip
leap
plications
–
4.4–
3–2:
Advan
cefees
inthe
case
offutilemultip
leasylum
applications
Increasedcharging
ofad
vancefees
oncostsforsubm
ission
ofarene
wed
asylum
applicationafterthefin
alruling
ofan
initial
asylum
proced
urean
dwhe
rethene
wap
plicationisfutile
Lead
:FO
M0
Perm
anen
tRe
ductionin
theprop
ortio
nof
clearly
futile
multip
leasylum
applications
filed
;ordism
issal
ofalargenu
mbe
rof
such
applications
onacco
unt
ofno
n-pa
ymen
tof
thead
vanc
efees
–
4.4–
3–3:
Crim
inal-la
wsanc
-tio
nsin
thecase
ofab
usive
politicalactivities
ofasylum
seek
ersin
Switzerland
Introd
uctio
nof
crim
inal-la
wsanctio
nsag
ainstasylum
seek
erswho
exercise
publicpo
liticalactivities
inSw
itzerland
solelywith
theintentionof
creatin
gsubjectivepo
st-flight
grou
ndsor
againstan
ype
rson
sassistingan
asylum
seek
erin
thisrespect
Lead
:Can
tona
ljustice
authorities
Participation:
FOM
0Perm
anen
tFina
ncialcon
sequ
encesforan
yone
subm
ittingmul-
tipleap
plications
who
enga
gesin
political
activities
inexile
inSw
itzerland
solelyforthepu
rposeof
crea
tingsubjectivepo
st-flight
grou
nds
Redu
ctionin
theprop
ortio
nof
such
applications
–
0.1–
1–1:
Quick
winsin
theinform
ationflo
wOccasiona
limprovem
entsin
theex-
chan
geof
inform
ationbe
tweendiffer-
entbo
rder
man
agem
entag
encies
Lead
:FO
M,S
BG,C
PZH
0–
Coveringof
repo
rted
need
sin
term
sof
data
andan
alytics
–
5.6.2Mea
sures
59
Mea
sure
45Ex
planation
Responsibility
Rea
lisation
phase4
6
Duration
Indicators
Commen
ts
0.1–
2–1:
Nationa
lstatistics
onilleg
alreside
nce
Mon
thlyintegrationinto
theILAof
theda
taco
llected
bytheFede
ralO
ffice
forStatisticson
policeregistratio
nsforilleg
alreside
nce
Lead
:FO
M,F
SO0
Perm
anen
tForw
arding
ofmon
thlyfig
ures
onpo
liceregistra-
tions
forilleg
alreside
nceby
theFSO
totheFO
M
Inclusionof
thesefig
ures
intheILA
–
0.1–
3–1:
Jointna
tiona
lana
-lysiscentre
formigratio
n(w
orking
title:G
NAM)
Establishm
entof
ajointstrategic
analysiscentre
formigratio
n(particu-
larly,tho
ughno
texclusively,illeg
alim
migratio
n)ledby
theFO
M,w
ithrepresen
tatives
ofallrelevan
tbo
rder
man
agem
entag
encies
Lead
:FO
M
Participation:
DR,
SBG,fed
pol,
CPBE
,CPGE,
CPSO
,CPVS,
CPZH
,CD,
KKPK
S,FIS,
VKM
1Perm
anen
tAna
lysiscentre
inop
eration
Effectiven
essof
thene
wan
alysiscentre:U
seof
syne
rgies,threat
detection,
circular
data
and
inform
ationflo
w,rem
ovalof
system
icweakn
esses,
curren
treco
mmen
datio
nsan
dop
tions
available
Two-year
concep
tan
dset-up
phasebe
fore
thecentre
becomes
operationa
l
0.2–
2–1:
Reinforcem
ent
ofan
alytical
skillswith
intheFO
M
Expa
nsionof
theremitof
theFO
M's
“Ana
lysis”
unitto
includ
e“A
nalysis
ofilleg
alim
migratio
n”
Lead
:FO
M0
Perm
anen
tCreationan
ddissem
inationof
analytical
prod
ucts
inthefie
ldof
illeg
alim
migratio
n–
5.6.2Mea
sures
45Themeasure
number
iscomprisedofthefilter
number
asper
thefour-filter
model(firstposition),thenumber
oftheproblemarea
withinthefilter
(secondposition),
thenumber
oftheindividualobjectivewithintheproblemarea
(thirdposition)andthenumber
ofthemeasure
withintheindividualobjective(fourthposition)
46Indicates
thestartofimplementation,cf.Section6.2
60
5.6.3 FindingsMeasures 4.1–2–5 (Overall biometrics strategy) and0.1–3–1 (Joint national analysis centre for migration)are the two central measures of this subproject.
Biometrics data and verification thereof are gainingground in the various procedures under immigrationand asylum law (registration and storage of biometricdata when issuing Schengen visas, issue of biometricresidence permits, travel documents for foreign nation-als, etc.). At present, the e-document system platformis primarily used for the issuing of ID documents.Some of the same system components are also usedin border control. The current system platform willprobably have to be replaced end 2019 on accountof contracts expiring and the age of the componentsused. With this in mind, it should be examined whichoffices require such a system platform and whethersuch an application should continue in the future tocover the needs of both those who issue and thosewho check ID documents. In general, it can be saidthat there is no consistent overall strategy shared byall relevant agencies behind these different systemshooked up to the platform, creating the risk of agen-cies acting only from their own viewpoint as the buyerand/or user of such systems rather than taking acomprehensive overall approach. Also of importanceis interagency coordination and cooperation forthe longer term, as envisaged in measure 4.1–2–5.
The joint national analysis centre fills a gap in thecurrent fragmented analytical landscape. This commonapproach gives an all-round picture of the phenom-enon of migration (particularly illegal immigration),forming the basis for a targeted and efficient deploy-ment of resources at an operational level.
While these 23 measures essentially cover a wide area,many of them serve to simplify identification ofpersons. Almost all of the measures seek to give policeand border control agencies easier access to the dataavailable. In practically all cases, the newly proposedaccess rights call for technical adaptations to the exist-
ing databases and/or the acquisition of new hardwareand/or software systems. On account of the technicallinkages and dependencies between systems, it wasnot always possible within the subproject work toestimate reliably which systems are affected by suchchanges, as well as how and to what extent, and whatcosts are associated with the changes. It should alsobe assumed that some measures will require legislativechanges. For all of these reasons, some measures areformulated solely as studies in which the outstandinglegal and technical issues have yet to be clarified.
There are also certain discrepancies between the indi-vidual objectives passed by the Federal Council inthe strategy and other requirements of the FederalCouncil. Specifically, in acknowledging the “Inte-grated Border Management” strategy, the FederalCouncil approved objective 4.1–3 (“Personal detailsare systematically matched against the relevantdatabases on the basis of the underlying legislationand technical facilities required”). Based on thisindividual objective, an attempt was made to improveexchange of data between migration and socialsecurity agencies as part of the working group “Legalstatus of undocumented migrants”. However, it wasnot possible to include this subject in the discussionpaper for the Federal Council, resulting in the FederalCouncil deciding on 13 February 2013 that therewas “no need for a re-examination of the exchangeof information between the areas of immigration law,social security and undeclared employment”.47
Responsibility for implementing the measures lies withthe FOM in most cases; in fact, there are only threemeasures in which the FOM is not involved. Overall,there is a wider distribution of offices, agencies andadministrations involved in this subproject than in anyof the others – which is hardly surprising given thecross-cutting topics addressed here.
47 http://www.bfm.admin.ch/content/bfm/de/home/dokumentation/medienmitteilungen/2013/ref_2013-02-131.html
61
5.6.4 Financial impactsMost of the complex measures exist only in the formof studies that will clarify some outstanding issueson technical, legal and operational implementation.Only after completion of these studies will it thenbe possible to make well-founded statements on thefinancial impacts.
Overall, the expenses for the measures not yet initi-ated are estimated as follows: Non-recurrent materialcosts of almost CHF 0.25 million are assumed, ofwhich around 75% is incurred by the Confederationand around 25% by the cantons. Some 70% ofthese costs are generated by measures 1.2–1–248 and4.1–2–249 through the procurement of external ser-vices. The non-recurrent personnel costs are esti-mated at 700 man-days, of which some 550 are borneby the Confederation and around 150 by the cantons.Around 60% of these expenses are incurred by justthree measures: 4.1–2–550, 0.1–3–151 and 4.1–3–352.The estimated recurrent costs are only 30 man-days,all of which are down to measures 1.2–1–153 and1.2–2–154 (both for the Confederation).
Most of the savings are primarily recurrent in nature;any non-recurrent savings are negligible. Regardingthe material costs, measure 4.1–3–155 in particularproduces annual savings of an estimated CHF 3 millionfor the cantons. In terms of man-days, measures1.2–1–156 and 1.2–1–257 in particular are estimatedto save over 50 man-days. Overall, the recurrentsavings in terms of personnel come to around 70%for the cantons.
5.6.5 SummaryAlthough some measures in the ”General“ subprojecthave not yet been sufficiently developed for directimplementation, this subproject produces a raft ofexpedient measures. These relate to the operationalas well as the strategic level. Particularly in regardto data flow and analysis, the measures seek a betterexchange of data and information between the agen-cies and a joint (interagency) and therefore nationalanalysis of the phenomenon of migration (primarilythough not exclusively illegal immigration). Numeroussystem-relevant improvements are also sought. Forexample, some measures greatly optimise or simplifythe identification possibilities, facilitating the day-to-day work of those agencies involved in operations.At the strategic level, the overall biometrics strategy,in particular, creates a long-term and sustainableorientation that is adopted by all agencies involvedand will serve as a guideline for all future decisionsin relation to biometrics.
48 New website with Schengen entry requirements49 Expansion of ZEMIS access rights50 Overall biometrics strategy51 Joint national analysis centre for migration (GNAM)52 “Identification” clearing unit (feasibility study)53 Carrier sanctions54 Cooperation agreements with airlines55 Asylum CS-VIS (project)56 Carrier sanctions57 New website with Schengen entry requirements
62
6. Implementation of the measures
6.1 Finance
Around half of the measures under this action planwere already initiated or even fully implemented in thecourse of the project work (measures under realisationphase 0). This was only possible – prior to formalacknowledgement of the action plan – thanks to abroad consensus among the agencies involved. Thismeans that financing has already been secured forall such measures (cf. Chapter 5.1), and so they arenot further discussed here.
The 38 measures still to be implemented have financialand personnel impacts on the organisational unitsinvolved (measures from realisation phases 1, 2 and3). The estimated expenses for these measures drawnup in the project phase for the Confederation andcantons are as follows:
58 FTE = Full Time Equivalent; 1 FTE equals 220 man-days59 This includes 1.5 FTE for monitoring of the action plan by the Entry Division of the FOM60 For example, simply setting up a joint national Migration Centre (measure 0.1–3–1) will not be sufficient to make savings.
However, the work done in the centre will contribute to the more efficient and effective prevention of illegal immigration,
e.g. by pooling the know-how available and generating synergies61 For instance, while the costs for expanding ZEMIS access rights (measure 4.1–2–2) are borne solely by the Confederation,
the savings are felt mainly by the cantons
Material costs Personnel costs
Non-recurrent Annual Non-recurrent Annual
Confed. approx. CHF 1.75 m approx. CHF 0.5 m approx. 6 FTE58 approx. 2 FTE59
Cantons approx. CHF 1.5 m approx. CHF 0.5 m approx. 1 FTE approx. 1 FTE
Total approx. CHF 3.25 m approx. CHF 1 m approx. 7 FTE approx. 3 FTE
The expenses and savings – whether in terms of ma-terials or human resources – can be clearly calculatedfor only certain measures. This can be explained bythe lack of detail for some measures, mainly as a re-sult of time constraints or their complexity, or thefact that savings are often made indirectly only60 anddo not necessarily benefit the same agency that borethe costs.61 Due to these circumstances, only esti-mates are given for many measures.
Where certain measures could not be defined in suffi-cient detail on account of their complexity, thesewere formulated as studies or concept mandates.This work will seek to complete the missing details,whether in terms of technical, legal or financialaspects. Correspondingly, information on the preciserequirements for potential implementation canonly be given at a later stage, targeting long-termbudget neutrality (see below) at all times.
All of the measures set out in this action plan makea contribution to consolidating and improving internalsecurity, protecting the national social systems andmaking Switzerland less attractive for illegal immi-grants and people-smuggling gangs.
63
Moreover, the costs for border management arelargely driven by external factors, such as, for example,the increase in the flow of persons and tourist traffic.In view of the sharp rise predicted for this pheno-menon, a marked increase in spending on bordermanagement is to be expected in the future. Thebenefit of the action plan will primarily lie in stemmingthis growing demand for resources and thus curbingexpenditure growth.
Despite the aforementioned difficulties, the action plancomplies with the requirements of budget neutrality,assuming that budget neutrality is defined as an inte-gral factor covering all government levels that cannotbe proven numerically throughout the entire actionplan. Where the savings cannot be calculated, it canbe assumed at least on the basis of the steering com-mittee’s estimates that the “benefit” of the measuresjustify the cost of their implementation.
The overall project management has examined numer-ous financing options, e.g. a flat-rate co-financingoption, a flat-rate allocation formula or a separatecredit line. However, due to numerous practical prob-lems (particularly the large number of players andthe heterogeneity of the measures), none of theseoptions proved appropriate. The financing of meas-ures thus remains the responsibility of the agenciesentrusted with implementation.
6.2 Schedule
In principle, the subprojects have defined a separate,isolated schedule for all measures. In the overview ofall 38 measures yet to be implemented, it should benoted that the measures are staggered in time, dif-fering in some respects from the schedules drawn upin the subprojects. This is necessary to ensure com-plete implementation of the measures, particularly inthose heavily burdened by day-to-day operations.The measures are also weighted to a certain extent soas to take account of their broad distribution in termsof content and their varied scope.
The above-mentioned staggering of measures is cre-ated by way of three realisation phases. Key criteria indistributing the measures among these three realisa-tion phases are the effectiveness (i.e. the relation be-tween the current situation and the target situation) aswell as the feasibility (i.e. the time frame within whichthe objective can be attained). Measures with higheffectiveness and good feasibility should be imple-mented as promptly as possible, while those withsomewhat lower effectiveness and feasibility shouldnormally be allocated to a later realisation phase.Subsequently, this initial distribution is followed byanother allocation round taking different criteria intoaccount, such as the potential and the urgency ofthe measure in question. This injects a certain degreeof political weighting to the process, alongside themore mechanical considerations. Annex III givesan overview of the three realisation phases andthe measures allocated to each one.
Realisation phase 1 contains 19 measures. Imple-mentation of these will commence directly afteracknowledgment of the action plan by the FederalCouncil, though no later than end 2015. In principle,the lead agencies are free to decide when exactlywithin this 18-month period they want to commenceimplementation, although obviously they should beginthe work as early as possible. This flexible time frame
64
should enable the agencies responsible – togetherwith the other players involved – to align the com-mencement date within their own unit with otherproject-specific and line tasks and thus also allow foran appropriate and resource-saving planning ofoverall tasks.
Implementation of all 13 measures in realisationphase 2 should be started as soon as possible,and by 2016 at the latest. Implementation shouldbe prompt in those cases where the lead agencyand also those involved have the resources requiredfor implementation at their disposal.
The remaining six measures are grouped togetherunder realisation phase 3 and should also be initi-ated as early as possible, though by 2017 at the latest.As with measures in realisation phase 2, implemen-tation should be brought forward if at all possible.
Those measures that are currently in progress or haveeven already been implemented (cf. Chapter 5.1) areallocated to realisation phase 0. These make up atotal of 30 measures drawn from all five subprojects.
As already mentioned in Chapter 6.1, this implemen-tation schedule is subject to approval of the resourcesrequired for implementation in the appropriate politi-cal processes.
Fig. 7: Realisation phases
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Realisierungseinheit 0
Realisation phase 3Implementation of 6 measures:no later than end 2017
Realisation phase 2Implementation of 13 measures:no later than end 2016
Realisation phase 1Implementation of19 measures:no later than end 2015
Ratifi
catio
nof
actio
nplan
The 30 measures are in progress or already implemented Realisation phase 0
65
6.3 Monitoring
Monitoring of the action plan will be undertaken bythe Entry Division of the FOM, which was previ-ously responsible for overall project management ofthe strategy and the action plan. Apart from variouscommunication and marketing tasks, this departmentwill also monitor and document the status of imple-mentation tasks on an ongoing basis and evaluatethe progress. It will check that the time requirementsare met with regard to the start and duration of im-plementation (cf. Chapter 6.2) and, if necessary, issuea reminder for adhering to the action plan. It will alsoobserve all border management activities. This con-cerns not only the measures mentioned in the presentaction plan but also new developments. In particular,it ensures that potential synergies are exploited (e.g.in legislative amendments) but also that duplicationof efforts is avoided. Furthermore, at the start ofeach year, the Entry Division of the FOM will draw upa report on the past calendar year, to be presented tothe Border Steering Committee for approval (cf. nextsection). The Border Steering Committee will then in-form the Federal Council and the KKJPD. The annualreport focuses on the status of implementation work.Apart from administrative and coordination tasks,the Entry Division of the FOM also performs technicaltasks, such as further development of the strategy,alignment of Switzerland’s position with developmentsin Europe and/or the Schengen Area, etc. However, itwill not conduct any concrete implementation work;this remains the responsibility of the relevant leadagencies. As the financing of the measures is alsoleft to the lead agencies and is subject to the relevantpolitical processes (cf. Chapter 6.1), this departmentis explicitly not responsible for monitoring finance.
The Border Steering Committee in its expandedconfiguration62 is formally responsible for monitoringthe action plan. This makes sense as the Committeeis already familiar with examining the strategy.63 Usingthe annual report drafted by the Entry Division of theFOM, the Border Steering Committee in its expandedconfiguration monitors, in particular, the status ofthe implementation work and informs the FederalCouncil and the KKJPD annually on the progress made.It also performs other IBM tasks, particularly in thestrategic field.
6.4 Framework agreement
The cantons play a key role in implementation of thestrategy and thus also implementation of the meas-ures. A framework agreement between the FDJP andthe KKJPD provides the basic commitment and con-sensus on the action plan. As well as the standard for-mal points (such as purpose and effective date, etc.),it also governs the main points for implementationof the action plan. This mainly concerns matters ofcooperation, organisation and monitoring (cf. in par-ticular Chapter 6.3).
62 FOM, fedpol, SBG, CP GE, CP ZH once a year expanded with the CD, KKJPD, KKPKS, FIS, VKM63 Section 5.5 of the strategy
66
7. Overall conclusion
Illegal immigration and cross-border crime, along withtheir far-reaching implications in many socially relevantareas (e.g. labour market or social security), generatehigh costs that are ultimately borne by the generalpublic. Efficient and effective prevention of these twocomplex and diverse phenomena calls for an inte-grated and coordinated approach that takes accountof the federal as well as, in some cases, local circum-stances.
At the same time, facilitating legal entry to Switzer-land – particularly for business purposes – is of centralimportance. Given the steady rise in the number oftravelling public, a fast entry procedure is essential andcounts as an important calling card for Switzerlandto gain an advantage in a highly competitive market.
In this respect, the action plan comprises a numberof various measures, relating to operational as well asstrategic aspects. They range from one-off measuresfor optimising the existing situation to large-scaleinnovations. Some of them have already been imple-mented, while some exist only in the form of studies.Taken individually, but especially as a whole, all of themeasures make an important contribution to improv-ing Swiss border management, laying the foundationfor attaining the general goals defined in the strategy(cf. Chapter 4.1).
There are numerous positive effects of the action plan:even the project work itself – for both the strategyand the action plan – has intensified the level of inter-agency cooperation and personal contact, reinforcingthe integrated approach to border management. Theindividual agencies’ understanding of the proceduresand options has improved to a certain extent and, atthe same time, opened up new perspectives. The workon the action plan also proved to be an eye-opener,revealing the interactions not previously known toall players in that form. What’s more, the action planoffered the possibility of viewing some previously fruit-less efforts in certain areas in a broader context, there-by increasing the chances of success in realisation.Despite differing interests in many cases, the partici-patory approach for most measures produced a rela-tively high level of agreement. Another plus point isthe possibility of evaluating the inclusion of new play-ers in border management. Some measures intensifythe involvement of certain organisations (e.g. labour-market authorities), institutions (e.g. Swiss Tourism)or private firms (e.g. airlines) that were previously notsufficiently included – thereby further promoting theintegrated approach to national border management.To sum up, it can be said that the integrated bordermanagement strategy and the resultant action planprovide a basis to view certain instruments and activi-ties in a broader context and to identify the interac-tions and dependencies. Integrated border manage-ment thus forms the common umbrella for all effortswithin Switzerland’s complex border managementlandscape.
67
Nonetheless, the work on the action plan also high-lighted how difficult it is to develop universally sup-ported solutions in a context of differing viewpointsand, in some cases, highly diverging interests. This re-sulted in certain measures having to settle for a com-promise at the lowest common denominator – despitethe fact that more advanced and far-reaching solutionshad originally been worked out. The realities of a fed-eral state and institutional constraints posed majorchallenges to the work on the ”Internal“ subproject,in particular, leaving their mark on the measures for-mulated in this subproject. It should also be notedthat implementation of the measures does not liein the hands of overall project management but withthe relevant lead agencies in each case. It is up tothese to drive implementation and, where necessary,request the financial means from the appropriatepolitical instances.
With the IBM strategy and the resulting measures,Switzerland’s border management authorities aremaking a first, major and important step towards acoordinated, harmonised and comprehensive bordermanagement. The changes brought by the upcomingimplementation work will be visible and perceivable.Nonetheless, fulfilling the general goals of the strat-egy64 will take continuous, intensive efforts on thepart of all players in every area of border management.
Through its comprehensive approach, the concept ofintegrated border management greatly improves inter-agency networking and cooperation. It also allows fora longer-term, strategic approach to the actions under-taken to detect future challenges in border manage-ment at an early stage and take the necessary pre-cautions. The harmonisation and simplification ofprocesses will also noticeably increase efficiency atthe operational level without impairing the qualityof border management.
64 Prevention of illegal immigration (particularly professional people smuggling) and the associated cross-border crime,
facilitation of legal entry, and legal compliance of border management as a whole
68
ANNEX I: Overview of individual objectivesby main topic group
Intensification of nationwide approach
Situational awareness, information exchange and analysis at an operational and strategic level
Obj 1.1–4: A circular flow of information exists between border management agencies and Swissrepresentations abroad and is compiled in a central immigration analysis.
Obj 1.1–5: The objectives of tourism promotion, business location marketing, etc. are alignedwith those of visa agencies and border control agencies.
Obj 2.1–2: Switzerland has a documented position regarding the further development of a nationaland European security architecture.
Obj 2.2–1: Participation in international committees regarding the prevention of illegal immigrationis prepared on an interagency basis.
Obj 2.2–2: The results of participation in committees on migratory issues are forwarded to all federaloffices involved.
Obj 2.2–3: A regular and systematic flow of information exists between the federal offices and the cantonsregarding the immigration-related topics discussed on the various committees.
Obj 3.2–1: The border control agencies regularly exchange operational and strategic findings.
Obj 4.1–1: All of the agencies involved in the enforcement process cooperate extensively and systematicallyand are subject to a reporting obligation where there are any indications of illegal immigrationor people smuggling.
Obj 4.1–3: Personal details are systematically matched against the relevant databases on the basisof the underlying legislation and technical facilities required.
Obj 0.1–1: Results of studies flow back along official channels to the operational level(circular flow of information).
Obj 0.1–2: National statistics exist on the apprehension of illegal persons and people smugglerswithin the territory.
Obj 0.1–3: All relevant information related to illegal immigration and cross-border crime is analysedat a superordinate, integral and national level (centre of expertise).
Obj 0.1–4: A platform accessible to all involved agencies exists for the purpose of circulating findingsin the prevention of illegal immigration.
Obj 0.2–1: Operational findings/outcomes form the starting point and benchmark for the strategicorientation with respect to third countries and countries of origin.
Obj 0.2–2: There is a regular exchange of information between the levels of strategic policyand operations.
Obj Objective
0 Filter no. (0 = applies to all filters)
0 Problem area no.
0 Objective no.
Numbering of individual objectives:
69
Obj 0.2–3: Issues regarding illegal immigration and people smuggling are given higher priorityin immigration policy.
Obj 0.2–4: Switzerland’s assistance to the countries of origin and transit of illegal immigrants is contingentupon their adoption of measures against people smuggling.
Obj 0.3–1: Consistency in the gathering and evaluation of information on people smugglingin all four filters.
Incentives and cost compensation
Obj 4.2–2: The decisive and consistent prevention of illegal immigration is promoted by way of incentives.
Obj 4.2–3: Cost compensation instruments exist in the prevention of illegal immigration.
Obj 4.3–1: Enforcement practices are aligned with long-term national interests and not short-term policyguidelines.
Optimisation and harmonisation of training,equipment, infrastructures and procedures
Obj 4.2–4: Supracantonal centres of expertise exist for the prevention of illegal immigration,people smuggling and the associated and/or subsequent offences.
Optimisation
Obj 1.1–1: Staff at Swiss representations abroad are aware of the specific migratory phenomena in relationto illegal immigration and people smuggling at their location.
Obj 1.1–2: The consular representations have sufficient qualified staff with regard to the number of visaapplications to be processed and the migratory pressure at their specific location.
Obj 3.1–1: The border control agencies follow uniform best practices.
Obj 3.3–1: Despite computerisation, the staff in the third filter are aware of the need to also consider“soft” factors, such as inconsistencies in behaviour and appearance or unusual profiles.
Obj 3.3–2: Synergies are sought and harvested in the technical development and procurement of newequipment.
Obj 3.4–1: Legislation is in place that requires airport operators to provide border control agencies withthe infrastructure needed for enforcing border control and removal measures and whichspecifies the extent to which airport operators have to contribute to border control costs.
Obj 3.5–1: Measures are intensified to identify persons who conceal their nationalityand/or the airline they used in border checks.
Obj 4.1–2: Systemic potential for identifying and preventing illegal immigrationand people smuggling is systematically utilised.
Obj 4.2–1: Substantial increase in the likelihood of detection within the entire territory.
Obj 4.3–2: Overlapping in enforcement is minimised; any remaining areas of redundancydo not hinder enforcement.
Obj 4.3–3: The agencies responsible for enforcing removal measures follow uniform best practices.
Obj 4.3–4: Agencies that issue residence permits systematically check travel documents for forgeriesand have the necessary know-how in this respect.
Obj 4.3–5: Training of investigative agencies is promoted on the subject of preventing people smuggling.
70
Obj 4.4–1: Fewer clearly futile asylum applications are filed.
Obj 4.4–2: Clearly futile asylum procedures are rejected at an earlier stage.
Obj 4.4–3: The filing of multiple futile asylum applications has consequences for the individual concerned.
Obj 0.3–2: Consistency in the prosecution and punishment of people smuggling.
Harmonisation
Obj 3.1–2: Border control staff training follows the same standards and is completed with a set of examswith harmonised content.
Obj 3.1–3: The border control agencies have the same or at least equivalent technical equipment.
Obj 3.2–2: The border control agencies establish a joint permanent committee on the coordinationof IT and infrastructure projects in the field of border control.
Obj 3.2–3: Official internships or exchange programmes are promoted between the border controlagencies.
Improvement to cooperation at international leveland with private-sector stakeholders
Obj 1.1–3: Swiss representations draw on their network of on-site contacts within the context of localSchengen cooperation to learn more about the phenomena of illegal immigration and peoplesmuggling and to circulate their own findings on these subjects.
Obj 1.2–1: The number of people who reach the external border despite not fulfilling the entryrequirements is reduced.
Obj 1.2–2: Greater cooperation and information exchange between public agencies and the private sector.
Obj 2.1–1: Switzerland intensifies its cooperation with EU Member States in the developmentof a European security architecture.
Obj 2.3–1: Formalised contact exists between Swiss and foreign border control agencies. Swiss bordercontrol agencies regularly and systematically exchange findings with foreign border controlagencies on the prevention of illegal immigration and people smuggling.
Obj 2.3–2: National police conferences regularly exchange findings with other police conferences,particularly those from neighbouring countries, on the prevention of illegal immigrationand people smuggling.
71
Lead“Third Countries”
subproject
FOMCD
Lead“InternationalCooperation”subproject
FOMDEA
Lead“Border”subproject
SBGCP ZH
Lead“Internal”subproject
Office for Migration & CivilLaw GR
EMF City of BernCP VS
Lead“General”subproject
FOM
Project management
FOM
Steering Committee(AP IBM working group)
Lead:Member of FOM Executive
Board
Principal
Federal Council
ANNEX II: Agencies and organisationalunits involved in the action plan
SBGfedpolFIS
FOJDILSBGfedpolCD
Cantonal representativeat the FOJ
FOMSBGfedpolCP BECP GE
FOMSBGfedpolCP TICP ZHKKPKS
FOMFOJSBGfedpolCDFIS
CP ZHKKPKSVKM
72
ANNEX III: Measures by realisation phase
Realisation phase 065
M-ID Measure Realisationphase
1.1–2–2 Project for optimisation of the visa procedure (POV) 0
1.2–1–1 Carrier sanctions 0
2.1–1–1 Examination of Switzerland’s participation in the European MigrationNetwork (EMN)
0
2.1–1–2 Examination of the introduction of a Swiss Registered TravellerProgramme (study)
0
2.1–1–3 Greater commitment in the field of visa liberalisation EU / third countries 0
2.1–1–4 Examination of cooperation with other European states regardingidentity checks and return
0
2.1–1–5 Examination of adopting the Prüm Decision for improvingthe prevention and prosecution of criminal offences
0
2.1–2–1 Prioritisation of projects for the Internal Security Fund (ISF)-Borders(needs analysis)
0
2.2–1–1 Catalogue of possible concessions regarding visas within the Schengenlegislation
0
2.2–1–3 Vade mecum with working principles for Swiss delegations in workinggroups at a European level
0
2.2–2–1 Optimisation of the dissemination of information on Switzerland’spositions in relation to migration at a European level
0
2.2–2–2 Contact list for “Illegal immigration / people smuggling” 0
3.1–2–1 E-learning tool for basic and further training in relation to border control 0
3.5–1–3 Strategy for performing key-point checks at the gate 0
3.5–1–4 Regular contact with airlines 0
4.1–2–9 Simplified ISA queries 0
4.1–3–1 CS-VIS asylum 0
4.1–3–2 Inclusion of fedpol in VISION consultation (feasibility study) 0
4.3–1–1 List of problem States with regard to enforcement 0
4.3–1–2 Inclusion of the list of priority return countries in the “InternationalMigration Cooperation” structure
0
4.3–4–1 Biometric residence permits (study) 0
4.4–1–1 No social benefits in the case of multiple asylum applications 0
4.4–2–1 Expedited asylum procedures 0
4.4–3–1 Entry ban for expedited asylum procedures 0
4.4–3–2 Advance fees in the case of futile multiple asylum applications 0
65 Measures that are in progress or have already been implemented (as at 31 December 2013)
73
M-ID Measure Realisationphase
4.4–3–3 Criminal-law sanctions in the case of abusive political activitiesof asylum seekers in Switzerland
0
0.1–1–1 Quick wins in the information flow 0
0.1–2–1 National statistics on illegal residence 0
0.2–2–1 Reinforcement of analytical skills within the FOM 0
0.3–2–4 Option of assigning federal authority in prosecutionof people smuggling (study)
0
74
Realisation phase 166
M-ID Measure Realisationphase
1.1–1–1 List of hot spot countries (illegal immigration vsSwitzerland’s economic/tourism interests)
1
1.1–1–2 Coordination of Airline Liaison Officers (ALOs), Immigration LiaisonOfficers (ILOs), Police Attachés (PAs) and Defence Attachés (DAs)
1
1.1–1–3 Training module “Illegal immigration” and “People smuggling”for representations abroad
1
1.1–2–1 Clarification of needs regarding tasks, resources and specific know-howfor the leading representations in the countries on the hot spot list
1
3.1–3–1 Coordination of procurement processes in the field of border control 1
3.2–1–2 Examination of restructuring of existing working groups in the fieldof border control
1
3.4–1–1 Participation of airport owners in the costs of border control and legalbasis for airport categories
1
4.1–2–1 Training and periodic retraining of ZEMIS users 1
4.1–2–3 Deployment of e-doc readers at migration offices (pilot scheme) 1
4.1–2–5 Overall biometrics strategy (study) 1
4.1–2–8 Simplified ISR queries (feasibility study) 1
4.2–2–1 Mechanisms to redistribute the enforcement costs in relationto immigration and asylum (feasibility study)
1
4.3–5–1 Training in the prevention of qualified people smuggling atthe Swiss Police Institute (SPI) as well as awareness and informationalevents and materials
1
0.1–3–1 Joint national analysis centre for migration (working title: GNAM) 1
0.3–2–1 Clear assignment of investigations in the field of qualified peoplesmuggling
1
0.3–2–2 Appointment of specialists within the police and prosecuting authoritiesin the field of qualified people smuggling
1
0.3–2–3 Appointment of investigative groups in the field of qualified peoplesmuggling
1
0.3–2–5 Consistent utilisation of investigative information in the field of qualifiedpeople smuggling
1
0.3–2–6 Obtaining information on people smuggling in the first asylum interview 1
66 Implementation to commence by end 2015
75
Realisation phase 267
M-ID Measure Realisationphase
1.1–3–1 Targeted use of local Schengen cooperation (LSC) by the representationsabroad
2
1.1–5–1 Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between administrative,tourism and economic bodies on raising awareness and coordinationof marketing activities
2
1.2–2–1 Cooperation agreement with airlines 2
2.2–1–2 Inclusion of measures to facilitate entry in negotiations on migrationagreements and partnerships
2
3.1–1–1 Mutual audits of the Schengen external border airports 2
3.2–1–1 National exchange of information on strategic and operational mattersin the field of border control
2
3.4–1–2 Examination of abolishing the exemption regime for non-Schengen flightsat Category D airports
2
3.5–1–1 General concept for the utilisation of flight passenger data 2
3.5–1–6 Examination of the possibility of the FOM delegating removal authorityto the border control agencies
2
4.1–2–4 Use of existing e-doc readers at representations abroad (pilot scheme) 2
4.1–2–6 Addition of a “PCN number” search box in RIPOL (feasibility study) 2
4.1–3–3 “Identification” clearing unit (feasibility study) 2
4.2–4–1 Centre of expertise for processing immigration cases from rail trafficthrough a pilot operation in Bern (feasibility study)
2
Realisation phase 368
M-ID Measure Realisationphase
1.2–1–2 New website with Schengen entry requirements 3
2.3–1–1 Exchange of information with foreign border control agencies 3
2.3–1–2 Joint visits of foreign border control agencies 3
3.5–1–2 Automated border control at airports 3
3.5–1–5 Expansion of the deployment of Airline Liaison Officers (ALOs) (concept) 3
4.1–2–2 Expansion of ZEMIS access rights 3
67 Implementation to commence by end 201668 Implementation to commence by end 2017
76
Notes
77
78
Notes
Federal Office for Migration FOMwww.fom.admin.ch
Konferenz der Kantonalen Justiz- undPolizeidirektorinnen und -Direktoren KKJPDwww.kkjpd.ch