Sample text: Hunting moratorium on private forests
Private property owners should be able to have their properties exempted from recreational hunting for ethical reasons. The background involves property rights guarantees, freedom of conscience and jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights.
1. Motion
The government council is tasked with submitting to the Grand Council a proposal to amend the Law on Hunting and Wildlife Protection (………) as well as the Hunting Ordinance (…………), introducing in the canton (………) the possibility of hunting pacification of private properties on ethical grounds. The legal revision must in particular ensure:
- that owners of private forest and other private land in the canton (………) can demand upon application that recreational hunting is no longer practiced on their properties if they reject hunting based on fundamental ethical convictions.
- that such properties are classified under hunting law as areas with hunting prohibitions or as hunting-pacified districts and integrated into hunting planning.
- that the requirements and procedure for hunting pacification are regulated by law, namely:
- Jurisdiction of the deciding authority
- Form of application and proof of ethical grounds
- Legal nature of the decision including appeal possibilities
- that overriding public interests remain protected by allowing targeted interventions by the competent authority in narrowly defined exceptional cases, namely in cases of:
- Disease control and animal disease prevention in cases of immediate danger to humans or significant threat to important material assets or compelling nature conservation reasons
- that the government council explains in its message:
- what scale of private forest area and other private properties could presumably be affected by the possibility of hunting pacification
- how this affects hunting planning, culling planning and wildlife damage regulation
- what financial and organizational consequences are to be expected for canton and municipalities.
- that the new regulation expressly complies with the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and the case law of the European Court of Human Rights regarding compulsory hunting and thus strengthens the property guarantee and freedom of conscience of property owners.
The government council considers in its proposal the necessary transitional provisions, particularly with regard to existing hunting plans and ongoing hunting arrangements.
2. Brief Justification
Today, property owners in the canton must tolerate strangers hunting for recreational purposes on their property, even though they reject hunting based on fundamental ethical convictions. While cantonal hunting law recognizes hunting prohibition areas, wildlife rest zones and other protected areas, it does not recognize an individual right of property owners to declare their land hunting-free for reasons of conscience.
The European Convention on Human Rights protects both property and freedom of conscience. The European Court of Human Rights has determined in several rulings on compulsory hunting in contracting states that property owners who are ethically opposed to hunting cannot simply be obligated to tolerate hunting activities on their land. Switzerland is a contracting state of the ECHR. The federal government and cantons are obligated to structure their legal systems in compliance with human rights.
Those who reject hunting for reasons of conscience may not be forced by the state to tolerate blood and bullets on their own property. Hunting-free properties are not radical, but rather a long-overdue consequence of property guarantee, freedom of conscience and animal protection.
The Federal Hunting Act establishes the framework for the protection and use of wild mammals and birds. However, the cantons have considerable discretionary scope regarding hunting systems, hunting areas, hunting planning and additional protective provisions. Within this scope, the canton (...) can exempt properties from hunting activities, thereby creating new refuge areas for wildlife and strengthening the rights of property owners.
According to federal law, no canton in Switzerland is required to provide for recreational hunting. It is the right of the cantons to decide whether hunting is permitted or not. If a canton decides against hunting or even only partially against hunting, it can do so freely according to the Federal Constitution. The Canton of Geneva has long chosen this exemplary path.
The present motion tasks the cantonal government with creating a clear legal basis so that private forest owners can have their areas designated as hunting sanctuaries for ethical reasons. At the same time, it ensures that overriding public interests such as disease control, safety and nature conservation are safeguarded and that the impacts on hunting planning, quota planning and wildlife damage regulation are transparently presented. This gives the canton (...) legal certainty and brings its hunting legislation into compliance with human rights requirements.