Box 1.9 Proportional rule and quotas

'American readers may wonder whether Swiss power-sharing amounts to a quota system, which would be unconstitutional in the United States. In the context of affirmative action programs, American courts do allow the setting of goals but not of quotas. Switzerland, however, does indeed operate to a large extent by a quota system, and the courts do not intervene. According to Swiss political thinking, not only individuals but also groups have rights. French-speakers, for example, should have the right to be represented among the top army officers. When a French-speaking three-star general retires, the search for his replacement is practically limited to French-speakers. But what about a German-speaker who may be more qualified than the top French-speaking candidate? The former is indeed discriminated against on the basis of his language affiliation. This is the price that the Swiss are willing to pay for their system of power-sharing. This price, however, should not be exaggerated. In the foregoing example, the highly qualified German speaker simply has to wait until a three-star general of his own language retires. Sometimes, of course, bad luck may strike; no opening may occur when someone is the "ideal" age for a particular position. For example, a German-speaking Free Democrat of Catholic faith, regarded as a top candidate, may never make it to the Federal Council, because during his prime political years, his particular combination of attributes may never be demanded'.

Excerpt from Jiirg Steiner, 'Power-Sharing: Another Swiss "Export-Product"', in Joseph V. Montville, Conflict and Peacemaking in Multiethnic Societies (Toronto: Lexington Books, 1990).