Geneva MPs water down restaurant smoking ban
The application of a non-smoking law in Geneva remains a hazy issue, as supporters of a ban vow to appeal to Switzerland's highest court a decision by the cantonal parliament to weaken regulations. The reaction comes after MPs amend legislation to allow bar and restaurant owners to provide designated areas for smokers under strict conditions, a move viewed as a slap in the face for four-fifths of voters who in a February referendum backed the prohibition of tobacco use in such public places.
The issue of smoking in Geneva's restaurants and bars appeared done and dusted almost a year ago. After all, nearly 80 percent of the electorate in Geneva voted in a February referendum to ban tobacco use in all indoor public places.
But victory for anti-smoking advocates was to be short-lived. Legal manouevering has prevented such a ban from being enforced. And after intense lobbying by restaurateurs, Geneva's cantonal parliament last night amended the law to allow restaurants and bars to provide designated areas for smokers.
The decision is the latest twist of fate for campaigners who thought the issue had been clearly settled by the referendum. But less than a couple of months after that vote, the Liberal and Christian Democrat parties discovered a legal technicality and brought it to the attention of the Federal Tribunal in Lausanne.
On September 30, the national court ruled that the cantonal government had applied the new law illegally by enforcing it before formal adoption by parliament. The law was put on hold.
It was then the turn of many restaurant and bar owners to celebrate. They did so by allowing smoking back inside their premises, though most provided special areas.
Last night, after restaurant owners - some of them wearing chef's hats - demonstrated outside Geneva’s Grand Conseil (parliament), MPs amended the law to allow the owners to provide smokers with designated areas. The change, after four hours of debate, came with restrictions, however.
The smoking zones must adhere to strict ventilation regulations and service by waiters or waitresses is not permitted in such areas.
Jean Weyer, administrator at Geneva’s Mr. Pickwick pub, is satisfied with the amendment. “From our point of view it’s a good thing," he told Swisster. "When they suspended the law we did provide smoking and non-smoking areas and banned it at certain hours like lunchtime. So for us it’s a good solution that will satisfy both types of customers.”
The new amendment also gets the thumbs up from a somewhat unlikely source: Jean-Louis Coudurier at the Tabac Stop Center in Chène-Bougeries. “It’s very good to have places for smokers and those that don’t smoke," Coudurier told Swisster. "I try to stop people from smoking but, if they want to, it’s okay with me."
However, the dispute over the law is likely to smoulder on. Those who want to uphold it in its original format, as voted by the population, have vowed to fight.
Socialist party MP, Laurence Fehlmann Rielle, an opponent of last night's compromise, told Swisster that the parliamentary decision was bitter-sweet. “I was disappointed, but on the other hand there will now be an appeal because this [the amendment] is unconstitutional and I think that the Federal Tribune will support us,” Rielle said.
“However, if we had won, the issue might then have to gone to another referendum which would have taken a long time," she said. "It’s a bit of an own goal from our opponents, because there are 1,200 places in Geneva. Some small coffee shops won’t be able to afford to establish a proper place to smoke, so instead of having a level playing field some places will have the facilities and some won’t.”
The appeal to the federal court now lies in the hands of the organizers of the original initiative. It’s unclear how long it will take the tribunal to come to a definitive decision.
In the meantime, issues such as exactly how quickly bar and restaurant owners are expected to implement the new regulations and how authorities will go about enforcing them, remain under a cloud of uncertainty. The canton has yet toannounce a timetable for enforcement.



