Despite clear constitutional provision, political initiatives to downsize, merge or close gender equality agencies and expert commissions are standard strategies in Switzerland employed by conservative and rightist politicians. This paper analyses parliamentary debates following initiatives to downsize or close gender equality bodies in two German speaking cantons (Basel-Country, Zurich) and a bilingual canton (Valais) between 2003 and 2015. Furthermore it evaluates two recent federal court rulings on state obligations to actively pursue gender equality in the canton of Zug.
The analysis shows that discourses are well entrenched in pro and contra frames. A core dispute concerns the question whether gender equality is yet accomplished as well as if and how far the state should try to influence society. Open anti-equality attitudes are absent in the debate, but gender equality institutions are often accused to neglect the really pressing equality issues, namely with (Muslim) migrants.
The success of these initiatives is mixed and depends on the size of the constituency and political balances of power. Also the impact is ambivalent – whereas there are hardly political majorities to outright abolish gender equality bodies, merging, downsizing or re-alignment of their activities can lead to serious impairments of gender equality policy. The moderate success of the strategic litigation in the case of Zug shows that promotion of gender equality must first of all come from politics rather than from the judiciary.
