[G7H+]

Quote

More than 57.5% of Swiss voters and 22 out of 26 cantons - or provinces - voted in favour of the ban on Sunday.

The proposal had been put forward by the Swiss People's Party (SVP), the largest party in parliament, which said minarets were a sign of Islamisation.

Muslim leaders across the world, as well as those of other faiths, criticised the minaret ban as a blow to religious freedom.

But European right-wing groups welcomed the result, calling for other countries to take similar measures.

"Provocation risks triggering other provocation and risks inflaming extremism," Mrs Calmy-Rey said at the OSCE meeting in Athens.

Sunday's referendum has forced the government to declare illegal the building of any new minarets, but Mrs Calmy-Rey said Muslims could still build new mosques and continue to worship in the country.

"Swiss Muslims are well integrated and will continue to attend the 200 mosques in the country," she said.

She said if an appeal against the referendum was lodged at the European Court of Human Rights, it would be up to the court to decide on its legality.

Source: http://news.bbc.co.u...pth/8388793.stm

European papers are dismayed by Switzerland's popular vote to ban the building of minarets. Some fear it will backfire, sending the wrong signal to the Muslim world and setting a precedent for other parts of Europe. Several papers criticise the type of democracy practised in Switzerland, which allows ordinary people rather than elected representatives to decide on such matters.

Quote

Thomas Kirchner in Germany's SUEDDEUTSCHE ZEITUNG
This referendum is a disaster for Switzerland. Such a ban on construction exists nowhere else in Europe. If those six words - 'the construction of minarets is forbidden' - are in the constitution in the future, they will violate... freedom of religion and the prohibition of discrimination. They also blatantly violate the European Convention of Human Rights.

Taha Akyol in Turkey's MILLIYET
This is a sign that when the masses become authoritarian, democracies too can easily become authoritarian.

Michel Lepinay in France's PARIS-NORMANDIE
In our democracy, the people's elected representatives are there to take decisions on their behalf and to shoulder the unpopularity that may ensue.

Dominique Garraud in France's LA CHARENTE LIBRE
The lesson of the Swiss minarets vote is valid for all democracies: its absurdity shows the dangers of referendums known as 'popular initiatives', a blessing and a fearsome weapon for all extremists who know how to surf the irrational fears of public opinion.

Source: http://news.bbc.co.u...ope/8388776.stm

Inside the Brussels bubble, there was commentary from people who generally dislike referendums and direct democracy, saying that such populist results are what happens when you ask voters about a single issue. Jean Quatremer, perhaps the best-read EU blogger in Brussels, drew a link with referendums on the recent EU constitution turned Lisbon Treaty, saying:

Quote

“Once again, direct democracy has proved its extremely dangerous nature. By allowing people to express their fear of the other, their rejection of rationality and their focus on short-term interests, referendums are decidedly a dangerous instrument in the hands of demagogues of all stripes. It is easier to understand why several democratic countries have simply outlawed them.”

Source: http://bruxelles.blo...ie-directe.html

For starters, I think the result is a great shame, and that the referendum was a dangerous and cynical exercise by the far-right party that sponsored it. It is also clear to me that well-integrated Swiss Muslims can only feel wretchedly isolated by this vote by so many of their compatriots, while radical Islamists must be rejoicing at a cause which they can use to gather support.

I think that this minaret stuff is neither a referendum problem, a religious problem, nor an intolerance problem. Clearly, what every commentator fail to see in this sad event is that democracy - even direct democracy - does not equal a state of freedom. As a political body, the people doesn't have to decide if they want to respect Natural Law or not - in this case, property right. If you own a piece of land, you are free to build a tower on it. You have the right to do that. Natural Law is not negociatable. So you can build everything you want to the extend that it doesn't impact the property right of your neighbours. If there is a problem, it will be solved by a consensus among neighbours or a trial, not a vote. The main issue concerning this minaret ban is that it enforces a decision taken by non-affected people. A plumber from Valais has not a word to say about a mosque in Tessin.

I find it easy to believe, as has been widely argued in the European press, that a similar referendum would have produced a ban on minarets in lots of countries.

I can see the counter-argument that some big Muslim countries harass Christians and ban public displays of Christianity, yet see the flaw in that counter-argument too: namely, if we cannot manage more tolerance than an Islamic theocracy that bans churches, we have a problem.

Don't count on me to join French journalists in denouncing Swiss direct democracy. The way the Swiss have used referendums to glue together their multi-lingual confederation is quite impressive.