The communication of the Vaud State Council fell a few hours before the extended weekend on August 1. The government announces that the Canton Constitutional Court rejected the request filed by the “12%” initiative committee. In other words, the link between the initiative and the reform of the tax shield is validated: the reform will only come into force if the Vaudois people refuse the reduction in taxes by 12%.
The employers’ circles and a part of the right judged the fact of linking the tax shield of the vote downwards contrary to the Constitution, because this hindered, according to them, the freedom to vote. The Court obviously did not retain these arguments. But the motivations for the judgment are unknown, which must be notified in the coming weeks.
The environments favorable to the initiative announce that they will appeal against this decision in the Federal Court.
Joined by Time This Thursday afternoon, the president of the Vaud State Council, Christelle Luisier, explains that the government “takes note of this decision”, recalling that the so-called guillotine clause “was introduced by the Grand Council. We are now waiting for the continuation of events, to find out if there will be an appeal or not. It may take a little more time, since we do not have the arguments of the court. Now, I see that we were right to wait for the final result before moving on to the vote [sur l’initiative 12%, ndlr]. It was just, and it’s just to wait for the final result on this point before moving on to the vote. ”
The Council of State opposes the drop in taxes by 12%, believing that it would cause a massive reduction of revenue for the canton, in an already delicate financial situation. Given the period of appeal to the Federal Court, and the voting dates, the ballot may differly be organized this year and will intervene more likely in 2026.
“We use”
“We respect justice,” reacts the national councilor PLR Olivier Feller. But for us, it is clear that this link [entre les deux objets, ndlr] Can have an effect on the whole of direct democracy in Switzerland, and federal judges must decide. We use it. Because we could start binding everything, and thus reduce the right of initiative. That’s why it can have a national impact. Federal judges will have an external look at the canton, which seems necessary to us. We continue to think that this link violates the freedom to vote. I would also like to note that the law provides that the Constitutional Court must make its judgment within six months. Not only have the deadlines have not been respected, but in addition we only have a decision and we still have to wait for the recitals, when the whole should have arrived on July 9. It is a way of proceeding which is not acceptable. ”
Development follows
