On 12 June 1994, the Swiss people and cantons voted on a federal decree revising the citizenship rules in the Constitution. The goal: to make it easier to naturalise young foreigners born and schooled in Switzerland. Around 300,000 people aged 15 to 24 could have benefited.
The proposal came from the Federal Council and Parliament and enjoyed exceptionally broad support: the Radicals (FDP), Christian Democrats (CVP), Social Democrats (SP), Greens, and even the SVP of the time, before its identity-driven turn of the 2000s. The aim was to address the wide variety of procedures across the 26 cantons.
The stakes went beyond the young people concerned: it was the first major attempt to loosen one of Europe's most restrictive naturalisation regimes, based on the principle of descent and on long residence requirements.
The outcome illustrates a Swiss peculiarity. The people accepted the text with 52.84%, but thirteen of twenty-three cantons rejected it: the double majority was not reached and the proposal failed. The vote revealed a clear gap between cities and rural areas, and between French- and German-speaking Switzerland.
▲ Cantons that accepted Bern, Basel-City, Basel-Country, Fribourg, Geneva, Graubünden, Jura, Neuchâtel, Vaud, Zug, Zurich. | ▼ Cantons that rejected Aargau, Appenzell Inner-Rhodes, Appenzell Outer-Rhodes, Glarus, Lucerne, Nidwalden, Obwalden, St. Gallen, Schaffhausen, Schwyz, Solothurn, Ticino, Thurgau, Uri, Valais. |
Actors and personalities
▲ Yes camp • Federal Council (author of the proposal) • Arnold Koller (Federal Councillor CVP, Justice and Police) • FDP, CVP, SP, Greens (yes recommendations) • SVP (national leadership of the time, before its migration turn) • Business circles and integration associations | ▼ No camp • Swiss Democrats (former National Action) • Lega dei Ticinesi • German-speaking conservative circles (attached to cantonal sovereignty) • Reluctant local sections (against party leaderships) |
Arguments and verdicts
▲ Arguments FOR (Yes camp) Recognising young people already Swiss in fact « These young people were born here, grew up here, speak our languages: it is only fair to open citizenship to them. » — Yes camp argument, 1994 ✓~ Partly confirmed The idea eventually prevailed: facilitated naturalisation of third-generation foreigners was accepted on 12 February 2017 by 60.4% of the people and a majority of cantons. But it took twenty-three years, and the scope remains limited to the third generation. Source : Federal vote of 12 February 2017 (FSO) Harmonising disparate cantonal procedures « Twenty-six cantons, twenty-six practices: clearer federal rules are needed. » — Supporters of the proposal, 1994 ✓~ Partly confirmed The fully revised Citizenship Act (CA), in force since 1 January 2018, unified certain criteria (residence reduced to ten years, C permit required). Naturalisation nonetheless remains largely steered by the cantons and municipalities. Source : Swiss Citizenship Act (CA), in force 2018 Facilitating does not debase citizenship « Opening the door to these young people in no way devalues Swiss citizenship. » — Yes camp, 1994 ✓ Argument confirmed When the third generation was finally facilitated in 2017, the Swiss conception of citizenship was not upended: no automatic right of soil, modest numbers, no observed devaluation of the Swiss passport. Source : FSO, naturalisation statistics | ▼ Arguments AGAINST (No camp) Naturalisation must remain a deliberate act « Becoming Swiss must be earned and requested; it cannot be quasi-automatic. » — No camp, 1994 ✓~ Partly confirmed The principle largely endured: even the 2017 reform keeps an application-based procedure, with no right of soil. Switzerland never shifted to automatic naturalisation — the position defended by the No remained structuring. Source : Swiss naturalisation regime, CA 2018 Risk of mass naturalisations « This opens the way to an uncontrolled wave of naturalisations. » — Opponents, 1994 ✗ Argument refuted No wave occurred. The 2017 facilitation concerns only about 25,000 people in total over several years, and the Swiss naturalisation rate remains one of the lowest in Europe (around 2% per year of the resident foreign population). Source : FSO, naturalisation statistics Encroachment on cantonal and municipal sovereignty « It is for municipalities and cantons, not Bern, to decide who becomes Swiss. » — No camp, 1994 ✗~ Partly refuted Cantons and municipalities retain a central role in ordinary naturalisation; the 2017 federal facilitation remains confined to a specific group. The fear of full federalisation did not materialise, even though Bern gained influence. Source : CA 2018; division of powers |
Affiches de campagne (5)
Factual record
1 Confirmed | 3 Partly confirmed | 1 Partly refuted | 1 Refuted |
| ✓ | The 1994 "yes" eventually triumphed… in 2017 The people had already said yes in 1994; only the cantonal majority was missing. It took until 12 February 2017 for facilitated naturalisation of the third generation to clear the cantonal hurdle, with 60.4% yes. Source : FSO, vote of 12 February 2017 |
| ~ | Integration recognised, but drop by drop Facilitation remains confined to the third generation. The second generation, the core target of the 1994 proposal, never obtained a genuinely facilitated regime; two attempts in 2004 also failed. Source : Federal votes of 2004 and 2017 |
| ! | Mass naturalisation, a fear never borne out The Swiss naturalisation rate remains among the lowest on the continent. The 2017 reform affects only a narrow group, without the tidal wave announced by the 1994 opponents. Source : FSO, naturalisation statistics |
The vote of 12 June 1994 will stand as one of the textbook cases of the gap between the popular will and the cantonal veto. A majority of citizens wanted to recognise as Swiss young people who already were so in fact; the rural half of the country stood in the way in the name of a more demanding conception of citizenship.
On substance, the supporters' central argument — the integration of young people born and raised in Switzerland — was eventually vindicated, but with a considerable delay and a narrowed scope. The facilitated naturalisation of the third generation, accepted in 2017, is only a fraction of what the 1994 proposal offered.
Conversely, the opponents' main fear, that of mass naturalisation, never materialised. The Swiss regime remains one of the most restrictive in Europe, and the numbers covered by later facilitations stayed modest.
Thirty years on, the debate over access to citizenship remains lively. The 1994 vote set its terms: between recognising de facto integration and clinging to a deliberate act of naturalisation, Switzerland has never truly chosen.