Here is a quote from it.
"According to the Swiss state secretariat for migration (SEM), the rule affected just 112 out of 45,000 refugees last year. An SEM spokeswoman told SRF: “If someone leaves voluntarily within seven months this person can get the money back and take it with them. Otherwise the money covers costs they generate.”
The SEM also said that jewellery and personal items were not taken from the refugees."
This doesn't seem very criminal, cruel, or heartless to me. It looks like a country putting the welfare of it's citizens above the welfare of refugees that have no alliance to it. This is...Wrong?
A country that offers asylum to refugees should never seize assets of the refugees once they arrive to the country. I find it deceptive to offer asylum as a neutral country and then insist on payment from people in their biggest time of need. Switzerland defends their actions by saying it's a "decades old" law.
I understand that it's a great cost to take in these refugees but to take their only belongings seem very cruel to me. They had to flee their country and now you're going to take the only things they have? They left with probably very little money to begin with.
I believe that if the refugees are able to assist then sure, allow them to help how they can. However, I believe many of them may be coming with either all they have left or only their most valuable possessions. It may be their only means of getting started in a new place or even a family heirloom. I don't think they should have to give that up, but I do think there are ways in which they can help that may potentially cut, or at least minimize, costs.
I believe as our founding fathers believed that taxation should always accompany representation. Who is going to represent the refugees? They are already extremely poor and have had to leave behind many of their possession's, not to mention their normal way of life. They already have things tough enough without being taxed without representation.