Woman criticizes inadequate consultation on hunting ordinance in court
Published: Tuesday, Jan 30th 2024, 18:40
Volver a Live Feed
The Federal Supreme Court has not accepted a woman's appeal in connection with super-provisional measures against the entry into force of the revised Hunting Ordinance. The private individual criticized the fact that Federal Councillor Albert Rösti's department had not conducted a proper consultation on the revision of the preventive shooting of wolves.
In mid-November, the complainant asked the Federal Department of the Environment, Transport, Energy and Communications (DETEC) to record this point of criticism in a ruling and to issue a so-called declaratory ruling.
This should also include the fact that the preventive shooting of wolves to prevent future damage on the basis of threshold values would disproportionately interfere with her fundamental rights and constitutional entitlements. The woman also demanded participation in a proper consultation procedure and that the entry into force of the ordinance be suspended from December 1, 2023.
No legally relevant disadvantage
As the Federal Supreme Court writes in a recently published ruling, the Uvek rejected the woman's application and did not issue an injunction. The "Walliser Bote" was the first to report on this. The private individual appealed to the Federal Administrative Court, which rejected her application for super-provisional measures in an interim ruling at the end of November.
The appeal lodged against this with the Federal Supreme Court has now been rejected. To do so, the appellant would have had to claim irreparable harm, which she was unable to do.
However, another appeal by the same person is still pending before the Federal Supreme Court. The matter itself - i.e. the question of whether the Uvek should have issued a declaratory ruling - has not yet been decided. (Judgement 2C_695/2023 of 18.1.2024)
©Keystone/SDA
Spanish 
English 
German 
French 
Arabic