Johannes Reich

Am 1. Mai 2007 wurde das Abfallreglement der Stadt Bern vom 25. September 2005 (AFR) in Kraft gesetzt. Auf dieser Grundlage stellte die Abfallentsorgung der Stadt Bern (seit 1. Januar 2010: Entsorgung + Recycling Stadt Bern, ERB) den fünf Beschwerdegegnerinnen mit Verfügungen vom 7. März 2008 Abfallgrundgebühren für insgesamt 23
Liegenschaften in Rechnung. Bei den Beschwerdegegnerinnen handelte es sich um vornehmlich im Detailhandel tätige juristische Personen mit in der Berner Innenstadt gelegenen Verkaufsstellen, in denen auch Speisen und Getränke zum Mitnehmen angeboten werden (Take-away-
Verpflegung). Laut der Stadt Bern (Beschwerdeführerin) werden die Abfallgrundgebühren insbesondere zur Deckung der Kosten der Entsorgung von Abfällen verwendet, die auf Strassen, Plätzen, Parkanlagen oder in öffentlichen Verkehrsmitteln unbedacht oder absichtlich fallen und liegen gelassen (Vermüllung; sog. «Littering») oder
in Abfalleimern auf öffentlichem Grund entsorgt werden. Nachdem die Direktion für Tiefbau, Verkehr und Stadtgrün der Beschwerdeführerin sowie – in zweiter Instanz – das Regierungsstatthalteramt Bern dagegen erhobene Beschwerden abgewiesen hatten, hiess das Verwaltungsgericht
des Kantons Bern (Vorinstanz) die Beschwerde der Beschwerdegegnerinnen am 19. Januar 2011 teilweise gut, hob die Verfügungen vom 7. März 2008 auf und wies die Akten zur Neufestsetzung der Grundgebühr an die Beschwerdeführerin
zurück. Letztere erhob beim Bundesgericht Beschwerde in öffentlich-rechtlichen Angelegenheiten mit dem Antrag, das Urteil des Verwaltungsgerichts aufzuheben.

Switzerland's model of power sharing in a multiethnic societyassimilation of the " new minoritiespublic primary schoolssocial cohesion versus cultural distinctiveness-Muslim students and compulsory swimming lessonsunconstitutional according to Swiss Federal Supreme Court decision in 1993reconsidered by the Court in 2008 Given its constitutional framework and political culture, Switzerland offers an example for the gradual inclusion of minorities resulting in a distinctive model of power sharing in a multiethnic society. However, global migration with its " new minorities " entails a fundamentally different challenge. Public primary schools, which are attended by virtually all children residing in Switzerland, thus face the diffi cult task of providing both for equal opportunities for all children and for social cohesion via a clearly defi ned educational agenda. This must be achieved at the same time the state respects the distinctive cultural and religious background of each student. The question of whether Muslim students should be obliged to attend compulsory swimming lessons in public primary schools has been widely discussed in both the legal and political arena after a decision by the Swiss Federal Supreme Court in 1993 found such an obligation to be unconstitutional. With a case decided on October 24, 2008, the Court was given the opportunity to reconsider the issue. This paper critically assesses this recent decision by the Swiss Federal Supreme Court in its social, political, and dogmatic context.

Die Ausgestaltung der Versicherung von Gebäuden gegen Feuer-und Elementarschäden bildet sowohl in der Rechtsprechung (Ziff. I/A) als auch in der Verfassungsgebung (Ziff. I/B) ein regelmässig wiederkehrendes Thema. Je nach Kanton haben sich unterschiedliche Regelungsmodelle herausgebildet (Ziff. II/B). In Appenzell Innerrhoden-dem Heimatkanton von alt Bundesrat Arnold Koller-sind für den äusseren und den inneren Landesteil gar zwei verschiedene Rechtsregime in Kraft (Ziff. II/B/4). Vor dem Hintergrund der hinsichtlich der Gebäudeversicherung als «negativ» bezeichneten Nachführung der Bundesverfassung (Ziff. I/B und V/B) arbeitet der vorliegende Beitrag die rechtlichen Rahmenbedingungen der zentralen Streitfragen-bundesstaatliche Kompetenzausscheidung (Ziff. II/A), Versicherungspflicht (Ziff. IV), Monopol (Ziff. V) und Dienstleistungen im Wettbewerb (Ziff. VI)-unter Einbezug historischer und ökonomischer Gesichtspunkte (Ziff. III) heraus und bezieht zum Meinungsstreit Stellung.

Federalism is ostensibly misplaced to mitigate climate change as a global public concern as it is prone to import the inadequate incentive structures existing at the international level into the domestic domain. Drawing from the legal structures and procedures of Swiss federalism, this article attempts to provide a more nuanced assessment of the relationship between laws designed to mitigate climate change and federalism. It seeks to demonstrate that federalism may support effective policies to mitigate climate change, provided that the architecture of domestic climate change law meets certain criteria. These include considerable federal powers, a degree of institutional flexibility, robust formal channels of influence for subnational actors on policy formulation at the federal level, ample room for regulatory experimentalism at the lower layers of federalism, and the 'right to act' conferred on the Federation to avoid political impasse among the constituent units.

Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz and Others v. Switzerland is the first case of climate change litigation before the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) where all domestic remedies have been exhausted. The Chamber to which the case had been allocated relinquished jurisdiction in favour of the Grand Chamber. This reinforces the potential of the case to become a landmark ruling determining the Court's approach to climate change. Ambitious policy pronouncements on how to mitigate climate change in the distant future are in no short supply. Whether a judgement on the merits by the ECtHR in the matter of 'KlimaSeniorinnen' will count as a 'success' should therefore not solely be determined on the basis of the 'message' such a decision will convey. Rather, a judgment that merits the status of a landmark ruling must go beyond such symbolism and establish a firm interpretative link between international law on climate change and human rights law.

Schutzwürdiges Interesse und Berührtsein in Rechten oder Pflichten als Voraussetzungen für eine Verfügung über Realakte; Anwendbarkeit beim Vorwurf von Unterlassungen generell-abstrakter Natur (E. 4). Hinweis auf demokratische Instrumente und verfassungsmässige Rechte beim Einsatz für politische Anliegen (E. 4.3). Entwicklung der Erderwärmung nach den Erkenntnissen des Weltklimarats (E. 5.3).Möglichkeit der Verlangsamung der Erderwärmung durch geeignete Massnahmen: Allfällige Unterlassungen bei den Anstrengungen zur Umsetzung der Ziele des Pariser Klimaübereinkommens berühren die Beschwerdeführerinnen im heutigen Zeitpunkt nicht mit genügender Intensität im Recht aufLeben oder in jenem auf Privat-und Familienleben, um sich mittels Art. 25a VwVG zur Wehr setzen zu können (E. 5.4 und 5.5). Beurteilung unter dem Blickwinkel des Anspruchs auf Zugang zu Gerichten in Umweltangelegenheiten (E. 5.5), von Art. 6 EMRK (E. 6) und von Art. 13 EMRK (E. 7).

Switzerland has undertaken a commitment to reduce its greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 50 per cent by 2030 compared to 1990 levels under the Paris Agreement on Climate Change. Throughout 2020 and 2021, the Swiss Federal Government and civil society were working towards achieving this target with a multi-pronged approach, spanning from the ordinary national and international legislative process to strategic litigation and the tools of direct democracy. One key project was the revision of the Federal CO2-Act, the centrepiece of Swiss domestic climate change law. The referendum bill was, however, narrowly defeated at the ballot box due to opposition from various interest groups. The ensuing draft presented by the Federal Council changes strategy, avoiding any additional levies to be paid by the population by raising the amount of the revenue of the CO2 levy used towards mitigation of CO2 emissions, leaving less to be redistributed to the population. At the international level, Switzerland concluded bilateral treaties on the international transfer of mitigation outcomes with various states. The Implementing Agreement to the Paris Agreement between the Swiss Confederation and the Republic of Peru is the first such treaty worldwide concluded under article 6 (2) of the Paris Agreement. Next to such governmental activities, members of civil society have tested ways of achieving more stringent climate change mitigation laws. The Swiss Federal Supreme Court rejected an appeal brought by an association of elderly women asking the government to take more far-reaching action to restrict the increase in global temperature. It found the appellants' individual legal interests to be insufficiently affected. The same court also decided in a criminal law case that the general threat of climate change does not pose an immediate danger as required for a necessity defence as justification for a criminal act under Swiss law. Furthermore, groups of civil society have brought forward popular initiatives like the 'Glacier Initiative', aiming at introducing a net-zero GHG policy from 2050 onward.

Neutrality-a political means to an end, not a constitutional requirement-has been vital for Switzerland but put into question amid Russia's military aggression in Ukraine. A Federal Supreme Court decision highlights challenges of comparative methods and the need for judges to master the 'grammar of religion' in constitutional review.

In view of the obligation to define climate change commitments in 'Nationally Determined Contributions' (NDCs), the transition from the 'Kyoto Protocol' to the 'Paris Agreement' is usually referred to as a shift from a 'top-down' to a 'bottom-up' approach. From this perspective, Switzerland, owing to federalism and direct democracy, takes the 'bottom-up' approach to climate change law to the extreme. Direct democracy allows for any law enacted at any level of political governance (Federation, constituent states, local government) that implements obligations under international climate change law to be challenged in a referendum and decided by the citizens themselves. This has implications for the functioning of representative democracy. It makes coalition-building around climate policy a prudent political strategy. This, in turn, comes at the expense of incrementalism. Federalism, however, opens up the possibility for local authorities, based on the preferences of their citizens, to take the lead and adopt more ambitious climate policies. This paper analyses these mechanisms in light of the year under review. It also assesses Switzerland's plans to use 'internationally transferred mitigation outcomes' (ITMOs) under the Paris Agreement to meet its NDCs. As part of its efforts, Switzerland not only entered into further cooperation agreements in 2022, but also signed the world's first climate protection project based on such a bilateral treaty on ITMOs, the 2020 'Cooperation Agreement between the Swiss Confederation and the and the Republic of Ghana for the implementation of the Paris Climate Agreement' that is. This report furthermore examines attempts to strengthen biodiversity through both international environmental law and instruments of direct democracy. It provides a cautionary tale of how environmental protection, especially biodiversity and nature conservation, tends to be hastily sacrificed in the wake of the looming energy crisis when constitutional law and the rule of law are neglected.

In a series of referenda held in 2021, Swiss citizens extended civil marital status to male-male and female-female couples (same-sex marriage), banned wearing face coverings in public, twice approved government measures to curb the spread of COVID-19, and rejected a constitutional amendment seeking to deprive the political parties of their role as gatekeepers of the judiciary by appointing the judges of the Swiss Federal Supreme Court by lot. The federal judiciary will therefore remain in the firm grip of the political parties making it virtually impossible to be elected judge at the Swiss Federal Supreme Court as a candidate unaffiliated with one of the political parties represented in Swiss Federal Parliament. Against the backdrop of the ubiquitous character of direct democracy in Switzerland and alluding to the introduction to each of the ‘Adventures of Asterix’, a French comic book series, the Federal Supreme Court thus continues to bear resemblance to the ‘one small village of indomitable Gauls’ that ‘still holds out against the invaders.’ By extending civil marital status to same-sex couples (‘marriage for all’) in a referendum, ‘[s]upporters of same-sex marriage’ successfully engaged in what John Roberts, the chief justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, called on them to do: to persuade ‘their fellow citizens – through the democratic process – to adopt their view’ (Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 US Supreme Ct 644, 686 (2015) (Roberts, C. J., dissenting)). Also in 2021, the Swiss Federal Supreme Court dismissed an appeal by Carster Semenya against an award by the ‘Court of Arbitration for Sport’ (CAS) holding that the ‘testosterone rules’ by World Athletics (at the time: ‘International Association of Athletics Federations’) failed to amount to a breach of Switzerland’s ‘ordre public matériel’ (‘substantive public order’). In the same year, the Federal Supreme Court, inter alia, handed down judgements on hate speech by a Member of Federal Parliament and on the right to privacy regarding ‘smart’ water meters.

This paper assesses the legal consequences of the framework established pursuant to Resolution 1267 (1999) and subsequent decisions by the United Nations Security Council imposing sanctions on individuals not necessarily associated with states or state actors. This shift in focus piercing the veil of statehood raises pressing issues of both international and domestic constitutional law, human rights law, and administrative law (including the emerging field of international administrative law) as the current system lacks basic guarantees of fair trial and effective remedy. After analyzing the current framework, this paper critically reviews two decisions evaluating this new generation of "targeted" sanctions imposed by the United Nations, namely the case regarding Youssef Mustapha Nada v. State Secretariat for Economic Affairs of the Swiss Confederation (SECO) ["Nada-case"] by the Swiss Federal Supreme Court and - in an added note - the case regarding Yassin Abdul...

ABSTRACT The Swiss Federal Constitution (Swiss Fed. Const.) grants 100,000 eligible citizens the right to propose a constitutional amendment. Such proposal can be altered by neither the executive nor the legislative branch. Also, no form of prior judicial review of such initiatives exists. Yet, the parliament declares popular initiatives invalid should they fail to respect, inter alia “peremptory rules of international law”. As a consequence, popular initiatives can come into conflict with provisions of international law not being part of these “peremptory rules”. Solutions to such constitutional frictions have been fiercely debated in recent years. Most scholarly contributions propose either a broader interpretation of the term “peremptory rules of international law”, limiting the substantive scope of popular initiatives or call for a more robust role for courts in order to enforce the alleged absolute supremacy of international over domestic law. However, such proposals are hardly in line with a methodically sound interpretation of the present Constitution. The interplay of legislative history, text, constitutional structure and the ultimate purpose of the norm instead ask for an integrated interpretation of Swiss Fed. Const. art. 139 § 2. The constitutional model presented in this paper rationalizes the mitigation of frictions between international law and popular initiatives through a transparent and accountable multi-level procedure striving for practical concordance.