In Switzerland, the real debate on citizens’ assemblies begins now

A Swissinfo article raised the question of whether citizens’ assemblies are in crisis as a form of democratic participation. Political scientist Andri Heimann is convinced of the contrary. A closer look, he says, reveals that the exciting phase is only just beginning.

In recent years, experiments with citizens’ assembliesExternal link have been held in Switzerland at all levels of government – local, cantonal and national. This was an important phase. It showed the potential of the mechanism, but also its limitations. And while the hopes of those who saw citizens’ assemblies as a panacea for saving democracy have not been fulfilled, neither have the fears come true of those who demonised them as a threat to representative democracy.

Citizens’ assemblies serve as a valuable complement to existing institutions. The random selection of their members ensures that not only organised interest groups, the politically active or most vocal make their voices heard, but also people who would normally shy away from political debates. In so doing, they open up spaces for the silent majority, thus bringing a more diverse cross-section of the population into political processes.

Problem-solving not political manoeuvring

As there are no opportunities for political advancement or re-election within a citizens’ assembly, the focus is more on collaborative problem-solving than party political calculations. Moreover, citizens’ assemblies provide a forum for an informed and respectful exchange of views on socially controversial issues, before a decision for or against is made. This enables policymakers to gain valuable insights into the perspectives and concerns of an informed sample of the population. In an age of fragmented public opinion and increased polarisation, citizens’ assemblies can thus make a valuable contribution to political culture, by fostering understanding, respect and acceptance of other people’s views. It is a participatory model that proves that constructive engagement with different opinions can lead to broad-based solutions.

>>Read our article about a a citizens’ assembly in Geneva that was cancelled at short notice:

After the experimental phase, we now find ourselves at a different juncture. The key question is no longer whether citizens’ assemblies should be trialled, but rather why, when and how they can be effectively used and enshrined in democratic processes. A look abroad provides some important insights here. In East Belgium, a citizens’ dialogueExternal link was institutionally anchored across party lines in 2019, as all sides agreed on the need to actively nurture and strengthen exchange between policymakers and the publicExternal link. Since then, a citizens’ assembly has met each year to discuss a given topic submitted in response to a public call for proposals. The results are then incorporated into parliamentary work. Meanwhile, in the German federal state of Baden-Württemberg, a government service centreExternal link has been set up to help local authorities to implement citizen participation processes effectively. Citizens’ assemblies are above all called upon when political issues reach an impasse and it is believed that randomly selected, informed citizens can facilitate decision-making by weighing up different perspectives. The value of the approach has been recognised, and it is now a key part of the region’s “politics of being heard”.

Citizens’ assemblies and direct democracy

Of particular interest to Switzerland are schemes that combine citizens’ assemblies with instruments of direct democracyExternal link. Thus, in Ireland and in the Canadian province of British Columbia, the results from citizens’ assemblies were submitted to the voting publicExternal link in order to reach a binding and democratically legitimateExternal link decision. In Germany, too, initial experience with citizens’ assemblies and referendumsExternal link has been gained at local level. Here in Switzerland, as part of a research project, the Centre for Democracy Studies Aarau (ZDA) trialled the use of citizens’ assembliesExternal link in the run-up to referendums. The goal was to furnish the public with an easily understandable and reliable voting aid. 

Especially in an age of emotionally charged referendum campaigns and increasing disinformation – including AI-generated content – citizens’ assemblies can do their bit in helping people form informed opinions. They could also usefully be set up after referendums, to support implementation of the decisions made, particularly where complex issues are at hand – such as the introduction of the 13th monthly payment of the Old-Age and Survivors’ Insurance (OASI) retirement pension, which politicians have been grappling with for over two years since its approval.

The use of citizens’ assemblies is increasingly gaining ground in Switzerland. In various towns, motions have been tabled to incorporate them in local government regulations.

Are the existing participatory mechanisms still relevant today?

A pilot projectExternal link is currently underway in canton Basel City to anchor citizens’ assemblies in the institutional framework. Meanwhile, in canton Geneva, a popular initiative was recently launched, calling for citizens’ assemblies to be enshrined in the cantonal constitution. Given the growing prevalence of such assemblies worldwide and in Switzerland, it is thus widely off the mark to say that this participatory model is in crisis. On the contrary, what we are seeing today is an increasing politicisation of the mechanism, which is a true sign of its maturation. As soon as democratic innovations move beyond the experimental stage and achieve widespread significance and recognition, serious political debates arise as to whether and how they should be implemented. This is precisely the phenomenon we are witnessing today, and it feeds into more fundamental societal questions: are the existing participatory mechanisms still relevant today, or are other forms needed to involve people more closely in political decision-making processes? And how do we want to actively shape our democracy in the 21st century?

Willy nilly, anyone who wishes not merely to manage democracy but to develop it further will have to give careful thought to new forms of citizen participation. Citizens’ assemblies play an important role in this regard.

It is interesting to note that political support for citizens’ assemblies does not fall along clear-cut party lines. While, on the whole, left-wing politicians tend to be more openExternal link to the mechanism, a closer look at just who convenes these assemblies reveals a more nuanced picture. Social democratic parties were often early supporters. But as the format becomes more entrenched, conservative forces have also been turning to it increasingly. Thus, latterly, citizens’ assemblies in Germany have often been set up by municipalities or federal states led by the centre-right Christian Democratic UnionExternal link.

In Switzerland, citizens’ assemblies have been initiated by players from across the political spectrum – from the left-wing Social Democratic Party and Green Party to the centrist Liberal Green Party and centre-right Radical-Liberal Party. The real fault line, therefore, runs less along the left-right divide and more along the following question: to what extent do politicians trust the public to contribute to constructive and sustainable solutions? Or, to put it another way: how open are policymakers to drawing on the diversity and practical experience of the citizens as a resource and involving them in political decision-making?

Cross-party political will needed

Some politicians are, however, unwilling to strengthen public participation, as recently demonstrated in canton Geneva. The Geneva Citizens’ Assembly for DemocracyExternal link was a remarkably ambitious project aimed at reflecting on the future of democracy together with the general public. It was initiated by the cantonal government and coordinated by the University of Geneva under the leadership of Dr Victor Sanchez-Mazas. The plan was not just to establish a citizens’ assembly but to create a broad participatory process, including digital participation and the specific involvement of vulnerable groups. After two years of preparation, shortly before the citizens’ assembly was due to begin, the project was cancelled following a resolution by the cantonal parliament. Individual votes within the parliament clearly stated that the question of the development of democracy fell within the remit of parliament and that broader participation was not required. This case illustrates a basic point: democratic innovations will only succeed in the long term if a cross-party political will exists to work with the population to tackle pressing challenges.

Given the growing erosion of democracy around the world today and rapid technological advances, the question of how we want to strengthen and further develop our democracy takes on renewed urgency. This matter should not be left solely to political institutions but should be discussed and answered together with the public. Mechanisms and procedures for involving citizens in this process are at hand and have been tried and tested. The real question now is whether the political will exists to use them effectively.

>>Some time ago, a nationwide council of young people addressed the issue of mental health. You may also wish to read our article on this topic:

Edited by Benjamin von Wyl. Adapted from German by Julia Bassam/sb

The views expressed here are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of Swissinfo.