Appeals against vote rejected Federal Court declares higher retirement age for women valid
The Federal Supreme Court in Lausanne has ruled: The vote on the AHV reform will not be repeated. The judges argue that the consequences of a revocation would be impenetrable.
12.12.2024, 12:16
12.12.2024, 21:17
SDA
No time? blue News summarizes for you
- The vote on raising the retirement age for women remains valid and does not have to be repeated.
- On Thursday, the Federal Supreme Court in Lausanne rejected the appeal by the Greens and the SP Women.
The referendum on raising the retirement age for women does not have to be repeated. The Federal Supreme Court unanimously rejected the appeals of the Greens and SP Women against the 2022 AHV referendum. The vote is therefore not annulled.
From next year, the retirement age for women will gradually rise from 64 to 65. This is what the electorate decided two years ago - with a wafer-thin majority of 50.6 percent.
However, the figures in the referendum booklet were not correct. On August 6, the Federal Social Insurance Office (FSIO) announced that it had calculated the AHV's financial prospects incorrectly. This led to an incorrectly high forecast of expenditure.
Consequences of the invalid declaration would be incalculable
Nevertheless, the panel of judges, consisting of three men and two women, agreed that the consequences of annulling the vote would be almost incalculable. This is because the increase in the retirement age for women was linked to the increase in VAT, which the voters also accepted.
The VAT increase has been in force since this year. A refund is not possible. Without a higher retirement age for women, there would be no legal basis for the higher tax rate.
In addition, numerous dispositions have already been made with regard to the AHV Act by employers and employees. Furthermore, the 13th AHV pension was adopted this year against the background of the disputed vote. The protection of good faith would therefore speak against the annulment of the vote.
Plaintiffs: Voters were misled
The plaintiffs against the referendum argued that the voters could not have made an informed decision as they had been misinformed by the Federal Council.
The figures stated in the voting booklet were based on the incorrect expenditure forecast for the AHV and were therefore misleading, according to the voting complaints by the Greens and the SP Women.
