I don't know about "Swiss" but residence permit holders of schengen countries (and more) are already allowed into Switzerland without a visa regardless of their nationality. Please see:

http://www.bfm.admin.ch/bfm/en/home/...altstitel.html

Not necessarily the case. Just the other day there were border guards checking cars and passports after the Mont Blanc tunnel, which is supposed to be a crossing between two Schengen states with "no border". Not surprising, I knew they'd find a way to get bogged down in bureaucracy and screw us again. Oh well, I guess it'll be back to the French consulate to get my Schengen visa early next year.

Guess there is a confusion so I try and explain again:-

1 - Permanent residents of U.S, Canada (Green Card Holders), E.U States, Schengen States ( who possess European Identification Card issued by their country of residence with passport of their native country) are allowed to enter Swiss too without a Visa but for purpose of tourism and no work and not more then 3 months.

The Issue has been raised by the Swiss govt for a number of people also having resident permit but not the Euro Identity Card and are there on contracts in various schengen states.. Example is that there are loads of people who come and work in Europe on a contract or as a dependent and their Permits are valid only for a shorter period of time and thus the swiss feel that they would immigrate to Swiss. U.K has the same Issue for not joining Schengen. Now as right now it is very difficult for all schengen state Visa members to give a list as to how many are Asians, Europeans, Latin Americans, Africans etc have these kind of permits (ltd period one,s) - Swiss government just wants to know as to how the human trafficking will be controlled likewise it is a question from Schengen States too as it is the easiest to get a swiss visa from anywhere to come to Swiss for tourism and so then people can dissappear anywhere without any tracking.

So all these delays have been happening since 2 years now. Hopefully they will be resolved soon and we can all travel freely and easily as promised from 2009.

In the meantime I am just renewing all my VISA's anyway.

http://www.bfm.admin.ch/bfm/en/home/...03.html#a_0003

"May I as a third-country national requiring a visa with an annual or permanent residence permit (Permit B or C) travel without a visa throughout the Schengen area after the entry into force of the SAA (see 1)?
In principle, yes. But I take my passport with me. For questions regarding the requirements governing entry to other countries, I contact the competent authorities of the country concerned."


So these guys don't know what they are talking about or do they ?

There are 2 annoying aspects to the Q&A:

1. The translation is terrible! The answer should read "Take your passport with you .... you should contact ....". Maybe we should forgive the BFM? After all English is not (yet) an official Swiss language.
2. The content is non committal. The problem is that each Schengen country is implementing the Schengen/Dublin agreement differently. So the Swiss BFM cannot predict another country's rules and requirements.

Well I applied for my schengen renewal today and asked the question to Finn Immigration officer. She told me in principal I should be able to enter Finland with my Swiss permit but it is upto the immigration officer at the airport to let me in or not so it is better to have a valid visa in the passport. SO MORE OR LESS TOTAL CONFUSION.. as they still are to get any notification from their foreign ministry as yet.

I doubt it's going to be in the foreseeable future ... at least not in Bern
Regular (not fancy expensive) stores, post offices, and sweet etcetera are not staffed with English speakers, even with very bad English. And why should they? Although I wouldn't complain if they were

But back to business: once Switzerland joins Schengen, if one has a written confirmation from a Schengen consulate (let's say the Finnish one in Bern) that one could enter Finland with a Swiss Permit B, wouldn't producing such a confirmation help sway the immigration officer's decision (if one ever encounters such an officer...)? Why would the said officer tell you that you are not allowed in, if you have a paper from their own countries' officials stating otherwise? Of course, if one is a known terrorist ...

from the Schengen agreement (http://www.bmi.bund.de/Internet/Content/Common/Anlagen/Themen/Europa__Internationales/DatenundFakten/Schengen__Agreement,templateId=raw,property=public ationFile.pdf/Schengen_Agreement.pdf):

"Article 21
1. Aliens who hold valid residence permits issued by one of
the Contracting Parties may, on the basis of that permit and a
valid travel document, move freely for up to three months
within the territories of the other Contracting Parties, provided
that they fulfil the entry conditions referred to in Article
5(1)(a), (c) and (e) and are not on the national list of alerts of
the Contracting Party concerned.

2. Paragraph 1 shall also apply to aliens who hold
provisional residence permits issued by one of the Contracting
Parties and travel documents issued by that Contracting Party.

3. The Contracting Parties shall send the Executive
Committee a list of the documents that they issue as valid
travel documents, residence permits or provisional residence
permits within the meaning of this Article."

So "each Schengen country ... implementing the Schengen/Dublin agreement differently" would mean that an individual country may choose which permits they would accept and which not? Or does it mean something else?

But then, if there are no borders, how would this work???

From what I gather - it is better to have the schengen Visa anyway for most of us on a NON EU passport. I have heard that Permit C holders will be allowed totravel easily (no cionfirmation though) but there is a lot of aprehensions about Permit L or Permit B (valid for 1 year).

You would not need a schengen Visa after you have the schengen agreement in force for switzerland as long as you have a permit in switzerland

Even if you have a visa for finland stamped on your passport it is upto the immigration officer at the airport to let you in. If you read the definition of visa it would have clearly stated that having a visa does not constitute a right to enter a country. So what the finn immigration officer told you is technically correct and having a visa does not change it

Every country insists that even with an official visa, the immigration officer has the last word! I hold a Swiss passport, i.e. visa-free travel to UK and US. Nevertheless, been interrogated in LHR and NYC. In the reverse direction, Swiss immigration waves through all Western passports without forms, stamping etc.

Zurich airport will open a special Schengen terminal in April 2009 when the summer flight schedules begin. Once that is operational, passengers could walk-on/off in Schengen space without immigration controls at either end. That is the theory. Actual implementation may vary.

I see... At the US border control they tend to ask everyone what the purpose of the visit is (well, not Americans of course), even if it is a visa-free entry. I am interrogated as to the purpose of the visit everywhere I go (I also have a red passport ), but I know that there is no reason why I should not be let in if I have a visa -- and it has never been a problem. The issue of having a permit instead of a visa, unless there exists a law that clarifies it all, is a bit different ...

I had a great case once: Canadians allow third-country nationals who temporarily reside in the US (e.g. on a student visa) to enter Canada twice on a single-entry visa provided that one has not been outside of the US after having left Canada on a first visit. Well, of course I have this sort of information with me as a printout when going through immigrations. So when, on my second entry, an officer told me that my single-entry visa had already been used and he wouldn't let me into the country, all I had to do was to start telling him that "you know ... there is actually an article in ... law ..." while trying to fish the printout out of my document folder, and he just waved me through. Was he just having fun or trying to figure out whether I knew what I was doing - I don't know.

I wonder if there have actually been a lot of cases when somebody is refused entry when having all the necessary documents in place (visa, stamps, etc) ... unless of course the name pops up on a terrorist list.

Exactly my point. Lots of hassle, pompous officials and a big waste of time. They must let us in. So why the circus?

So the consular officer at the Italian consulate in Bern told us we would get a multiple visa valid 28.10.2008 - 27.01.2009, with the duration of stay: 10 days.

The consular officer assured us that "the duration of stay" means how many days you can stay in the Schengen space (well, he kept saying "in Italy") EVERY TIME you enter the Schengen zone. This is NOT what I have heard or read in forums previously. Everybody seems to say that "the duration of stay" is the TOTAL (ADDED) number of days you can spend in the Schengen zone during the validity of the visa.

I've been searching the web like crazy for official information clarifying this, all in vain. Could anyone direct me to any such official site?

HELP!!!

OK, update on my search:
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/...001:01:EN:HTML


"Example 8
MULTIPLE-ENTRY SHORT-STAY VISA
- The duration of validity is calculated from the date of departure + 6 months maximum on the basis of the documentary evidence provided.
- The duration of the stay may not exceed 90 days in any six-month period (in the example shown here, but the duration may also be less). The duration of the stay is that of the cumulative total of successive stays. ..."

What to do??? The consular officer says one thing, and the law says quite the opposite... Any thoughts or experiences here?

My wife has a Guinean passport and a B permit for Switzerland. As she does not have a Schengen visa will she be able to travel freely within Europe?

As much as I know you'd like to hear otherwise, the truth is that the TOTAL number of days allowed is as on your visa. I was assured once by the Austrian embassy that this was "per visit", but on the way back I had a layover in Munich where the police "randomly" selected me for a passport check. They were perturbed since that was my 11th day, and they made a big fuss until they found out that I was on my way back to Switzerland and that on a B permit one can transit through if I had no intention of staying.

Trust me, I would not have wanted to have broken any visa rules there.... those guys meant business. Be safe, and never assume. Schengen in just an agreement. Each country enforces it their own way. No consulate knows the precise rules anyway.

We don't want to break the rules either! Now we have multiple-entry visas valid until 28.01.09, with the duration of stay 10 days. We are going to Milan 13.11 and coming back from Venice 25.11, with three days supposedly outside of Schengen on a cruise in between - two days in Turkey and one in Croatia (see question 1 below). How we are going to fit this trip (for which all the documents have been submitted) into 10 days, I don't know Let alone all the conferences we wanted to attend and to present at in December and January. Now that we have an open visa until the end of January, we won't be able to apply for a new visa while this one is still "valid." What is Switzerland doesn't enter the cooperative Schengen agreement December 4-5???

We actually emailed to the Consulate, i.e. the consular office who processed our application, with the reference to the EU Law about the duration of stay (the next day we applied) and asked them to either extend the duration of stay or to shorten the validity of the visa until 26.11.08. Well, they didn't do either. And that same consular officer, when we confronted him about the duration of stay issue, actually ADMITTED that it is indeed the total, but according to his calculations we would stay in Italy 10 days and he didn't care about anything else. And his response to us, when we pointed out to him that we would also visit Greece for one day on that same Mediterranean cruise and this should also count as one day, he said - Go to the Greek Consulate and get a visa from them. Just amazing...

Question 1:
Does anyone have any experience with Mediterranean cruises that originate and conclude in Schengen (e.g., Italy-Greece-Turkey-Croatia-Italy)? In particular, is it ever possible to get an exit stamp and when? When we get on board in Greece or before we disembark in the first Turkish port? The Turks don't require a visa from cruise passengers, so I doubt there'll be any border patrol ... And will we get an entry stamp after we get on board after spending half a day in Croatia/ dock in Venice?

Question 2:
Did anybody ever try questioning the duration of stay on their visas at the Consulate? Is there any agency/ body/ institution to complain to?

I know you'll be laughing at me, but why such injustice?

If ever, hound the authorities at the ports to find someone who can stamp your visa. If they start giving you BS about it not being necessary, demand it and say it's your right. Just don't get too agressive. And it may turn out that they've gotten rid of the infrastructure to stamp passports a long time ago, but I'm not sure. If there isn't a border patrol... well, I dunno. Cross your fingers and hope for the best. Nothing funny about it. As a Russian (thus non-EU national) in Switzerland, you start getting used to authorities treating you like crap after a while. They're all polite to you when they ask for your passport and then once they see the Russian passport their entire attitude changes like you're not human or something. If you're black, as I've seen and been told by friends, you don't even get the initial courtesy.

So needless to say, asking them to be understanding or accomodating with your travel plans is a lost cause. They give you the visa and as far as they're concerned, their job is done.

Just today on the radio I heard the far-right party UDC are urging Switzerland to halt their entry into Schengen. People are voting on it again in February. I wouldn't be surprised if it doesn't pass this time. The possibility of being able to travel freely sounded too good to be true, and now, as we're finding out with all the delays, false-starts, and government hesitation, it looks like that may actually be the case.

Zhelayu uspexa with your situation.