The Verdict: Zurich Airport Expansion Upheld by Federal Court
In March, voters made a pivotal decision regarding the future of Zurich Airport by approving the extension of two runways. This project is slated for completion in a decade. During the campaign, opponents of the initiative used strong rhetoric, focusing on the text in the voting brochure.
The leading organization, “Fair in Air,” labeled it a “scandal” and threatened to file a voting rights complaint with the Federal Court. The widespread accusation was that the government council, supporting the runway expansion, had “omitted” the opponents’ arguments in the voting brochure.
The Allegation of a Rigged Game
Fair in Air submitted their voting rights complaint in December, while the vote took place on March 3rd. Due to time constraints, it was clear from the start that the Federal Court would not rule before the voting date.
The airport critics claimed that a rigged game was being played. They even tried to prevent the distribution of the voting brochure, but their efforts were in vain.
Now, the Federal Court’s decision is out, and it fully supports the government council.
The Right to Equal Length
The Federal Court explains that the government’s explanations serve a different purpose than the referendum committee’s statements. The government must remain impartial and neutral to facilitate voters’ free will formation.
On the other hand, the referendum committee can communicate unilaterally. “Such a statement naturally is shorter,” according to the Federal Court.
The issue of noise and pollution was not concealed from the public, as stated in the verdict. It was addressed in the referendum committee’s statement. Additionally, political parties were allowed to express their views in the voting brochure.
Indeed, the Social Democratic Party, Greens, and Alternative List, who were defeated in the runway expansion decision in the cantonal council, each received a page in the brochure. In total, the government had three pages, while opponents had two.
The Federal Court also clarifies the behavior of the State Chancellery. They tried “until the last possible moment” to enable the referendum committee to submit a compliant statement. “The referendum committee was given enough time to submit a text without graphics, which it failed to do despite repeated requests.”
From the outset, airport critics were suspected of artificially orchestrating the controversy surrounding the voting brochure to attract attention and portray the government in a negative light. The ruling from Lausanne has not dispelled this suspicion.
FAQs
What was the outcome of the voting rights complaint filed by Fair in Air?
The Federal Court rejected the complaint, upholding the government council’s position on the Zurich Airport expansion.
Were all parties given equal space in the voting brochure?
No, the government had three pages, while opponents of the expansion had two pages in the brochure.
Did the State Chancellery act appropriately in handling the referendum committee’s statement?
According to the Federal Court, the State Chancellery made efforts to accommodate the referendum committee’s submission, but the committee failed to comply with the requirements.