Bernese taxpayers are unable to obtain information from the authorities despite the law on access to information
The Bernese law on access to information rules on transparency and the authorities’ duty to provide information.
Paragraph 3.3 of Article 27 states: ‘Every person has the right to inspect official files, provided that this does not conflict with overriding public or private interests.’
Furthermore, paragraph 3.3 of Article 31 states:
- Information relating to the administrative activities of the authorities may be requested from the cantonal and municipal authorities.
- Enquiries must be answered as quickly as possible.
- Enquiries of this nature are free of charge
A law that seems to exist only on paper! We have already been informed on several occasions by members of the public that specific questions regarding planned or carried out forestry operations had not been answered, or had only been answered in very general terms. Instead of providing a substantive response, authorities happen either to refer enquirers to websites where the requested information could not be found, or to offer only verbal information.
Where a specific written reply was insisted upon, the correspondence was declared closed despite unresolved questions.
This raises the fundamental question of how the principles of transparency and public access are to be implemented in practice. Apart from the law as it stands, citizens fund the activities of public authorities through their taxes and are therefore entitled to expect that factual questions regarding government action are answered in a clear and specific manner.
Not only state-owned enterprises or public-law bodies are directly bound by the law, but also private-law or corporate forestry enterprises operating on behalf of the state.
Failing to answer questions only reinforces the impression that apparent malpractices are being covered up. This is the case, for example, with the planned logging on Seestrasse between Bönigen and Iseltwald, where all old beech trees are to be felled. Although the district forester, Mr Jonas Heuberger of Beo Wald und Holz, does not consider the felling to be a breach of the ‘sustainability regulations’, he was unwilling to answer our questions. The Bönigen municipal council (the forest’s owner) has not even responded to our email.
Another example of a refusal to provide information concerns, amongst others, the Office for Forestry and Natural Hazards (AWN).
June 2026