Business 26.4125: Rule-of-law guarantees in cantonal migration enforcement – consequences of the events in the Canton of Basel-Landschaft Submitted by: Miriam Locher. Type of business: Interpellation Status: Submitted Submission date: 2026-09-15T00:00:00Z Submitted text: The Federal Council is requested to answer the following questions: What findings does the Federal Council have regarding the events at the Basel-Landschaft migration office insofar as they concern the enforcement of federal law? How does the Confederation ensure that cantonal migration authorities always issue formal, appealable decisions when rights or residence entitlements are affected? What indications of systematic deficits in access to legal remedies in cantonal migration enforcement does the Federal Council see? What instruments are available to the State Secretariat for Migration (SEM) to monitor the cantons’ lawful application of the Foreign Nationals and Integration Act and the Agreement on the Free Movement of Persons? How does the Confederation verify that EU/EFTA nationals are treated according to uniform criteria throughout Switzerland? What measures exist against discriminatory practices in migration authorities, in particular on the grounds of origin, religion or appearance? What measures exist against comparable discrimination by the disability insurance scheme or the child and adult protection authority? Is the Federal Council prepared to examine minimum standards for documentation and quality assurance in cantonal migration enforcement? What options do affected persons have for having unlawful earlier decisions reviewed, and does the Federal Council see a need for additional action in this regard? Rationale: The publicly known allegations against a former senior official of the Office for Migration, Integration and Citizenship of the Canton of Basel-Landschaft raise fundamental questions about the rule-of-law implementation of foreign nationals and integration law as well as free movement law. According to media reports, affected persons are said in some cases to have received letters instead of formal, appealable decisions. There are also allegations of discriminatory treatment of individual groups of applicants. Since the cantons enforce federal law, the question arises as to whether the existing federal supervisory and quality assurance mechanisms are sufficient to ensure the protection of fundamental rights, access to legal remedies and non-discriminatory administrative practice.