Entry ban against speaker lifted

On 10 October 2024, the Federal Office of Police (fedpol) imposed an 18-day entry ban against an Austrian national. In this way, fedpol prevented the individual concerned from giving a lecture on 19 October 2024 at an event organised by the Swiss group Junge Tat. According to fedpol, the group belongs to the violent far-right extremist movement, and it can be assumed that the person they invited to speak supports or endorses the group’s violent extremist goals. Consequently, there was reason to believe that Switzerland’s internal or external security was at risk. The entry ban was published in the Federal Gazette on 11 October 2024 and was effective for Switzerland and the Principality of Liechtenstein from the 10th to the 27th of October 2024. The individual concerned lodged an appeal against the entry ban with the Federal Administrative Court (FAC).

Although the practical interest in handling the appeal in this case lapsed on the 28th of October 2024, the FAC examined the legal issues involved because of their precedent-setting nature. These issues may arise again at any time, they are of fundamental significance and, owing to their event-related immediacy, can hardly ever be subjected to judicial review in a timely manner.

No threat to internal security
The Zurich-Sihl public prosecutor's office has issued penalty orders against six members of the Junge Tat group, while criminal investigations are ongoing against two others. The appellant is a polarising activist, politically positioned at the extreme far-right. Contrary to fedpol’s opinion, the mere fact that he appears with the Junge Tat group does not per se imply that he supports or advocates violent extremist offences. Even if he had intended to give a speech at an event organised by Junge Tat, there is no causal connection between the ongoing criminal proceedings against certain members of Junge Tat and any threat he may pose to internal security. While it is true that a degree of networking and reciprocal radicalisation through his contacts with the group cannot be ruled out, this could also happen independently of his travelling to Switzerland. The ban order, on the other hand, ultimately results in a ban on free speech. Moreover, it is debatable whether an 18-day entry ban is an appropriate measure to sustainably contain or prevent radicalisation. Following this reasoning, the appellant’s entry into Switzerland does not pose a threat to Switzerland's internal security. The FAC upholds the appeal and retroactively lifts the entry ban.

This Judgment may be appealed to the Federal Supreme Court.