Cantonal vote LU Lucerne SP takes voting rights complaint to the Federal Supreme Court

SDA

11.9.2024 - 10:43

The Lucerne government has rejected the cantonal SP's appeal against the vote on the 2025 tax law revision. (archive image)
The Lucerne government has rejected the cantonal SP's appeal against the vote on the 2025 tax law revision. (archive image)
Keystone

The Federal Supreme Court will have to rule on the balance of Lucerne's voting message on the 2025 tax law revision. After the Lucerne cantonal council rejected a voting rights appeal by the SP, the SP is appealing to the next instance.

The SP of the canton of Lucerne lodged an appeal against the vote on the tax law around a week ago. It demanded that the vote on September 22 should be postponed. The party complained that the government council's voting message was one-sided and lacked transparency.

The cantonal government disagrees, as it announced on Wednesday. The information provided by the authorities was "factual" and "balanced". The amount of the tax losses and the costs were mentioned, and it was also pointed out in the voting message that the figures were based on estimates and that changes were possible. In a press release, the government also provided information about the new findings on the level of the OECD minimum tax.

Free to form an opinion

The government council explained that the voters had been able to form their own opinion. The objection was therefore rejected.

The SP is lodging an appeal against the government council's decision with the Federal Supreme Court, as it also announced on Wednesday. The cantonal government's arguments are not convincing. It remains convinced that the right to a balanced presentation was violated in the voting message.

It is hardly surprising that the cantonal government considers its own voting message to be factual and balanced, the SP continued. It wondered whether the government council was the right appeal body if it had to assess its own decisions. Whether this regulation makes sense in terms of the rule of law is "more than questionable".

SDA