Deregulation strategies and its regulating effects: The case of the termination of Social Assistance for rejected asylum seekers in Switzerland

Deregulation strategies and their regulating effects: The case of the termination of Social Assistance for rejected asylum seekers in Switzerland. In Switzerland, rejected asylum seekers no longer have any residence rights. In 2003 the Swiss state decided to terminate the so far granted social assistance for people with a non-entry decision on their asylum request. In 2008 the termination of social assistance was expanded to all rejected asylum seekers. Nevertheless, facing the impossibility of deporting them, the Swiss state entitled this group of people to emergency assistance. It is a basic, which is stated in the Swiss Federal constitution. In this context, new structures were established specially for rejected asylum seekers. These structures had to be set up, financed, controlled, managed and legitimized. For example, collective centres were set up exclusively for rejected asylum seekers. In this speech, I want to analyze the political and bureaucratic process of terminating social assistance for rejected asylum seekers. The exclusion of rejected asylum seekers from social aid was embedded in a wider austerity program of the Federal State. The Federal Migration Office had been requested to save money. The main official goal was to reduce the support of these illegalized people, reduce any structures that would prolong their stay on Swiss ground and to set incentives so that they would leave the country on their own. But during the implementation, new regulating effects emerged. Drawing on ethnographic material, I will highlight these “messy procedures” (Sciortino 2004). First, I will analyze the means and goals developed by the Federal authorities while conceptualising the termination of social assistance. Second, I will focus on the new built structures and elaborate the practices and legitimating strategies of the authorities. As a conclusion, I will analyze the ambivalences of these processes which, at the end, established specific structures for the “unwanted”.