Facts
The appellants, owners of protected or potentially protected buildings in the Canton of Zug, challenged a partial revision of the Cantonal Heritage Protection Act of 31 January 2019. They claimed that the new provisions on the designation of monuments as protected violate the Federal Constitution and Switzerland's international law obligations in the field of heritage protection. The FSCA partially upheld the appeal and annulled § 25(4) of the Heritage Protection Act, which allowed objects less than 70 years old to be placed under protection against the will of the owners. In all other respects, the FSCA dismissed the appeal.Considerations
The FSCA held that the provisions of the Cantonal Heritage Protection Act, which impose higher requirements for the designation of monuments as protected, are compatible with the Federal Cst. and the Convention for the Protection of the Architectural Heritage of Europe (Granada Convention). The use of the term "extremely" in the provisions on the worthiness of protection and the designation as protected may not be interpreted more restrictively than the term "outstanding" used in the Granada Convention. The requirement that at least two out of three criteria (scientific, cultural or local historical value) must be cumulatively met can also be interpreted in conformity with the Convention. However, § 25(4) of the Heritage Protection Act, which allows…