{

Facts

Parties and procedural participants:

The appellant ([A.] ) filed an appeal in its own name and on behalf of the wolves of the Calfeisental pack against the cull order issued by the Office for Nature, Hunting and Fishing (ANJF) of the Canton of St. Gallen. The Department of Economic Affairs of the Canton of St. Gallen dismissed the appeal with a decision dated 23 January 2024. The appellant filed an appeal with the Administrative Court of the Canton of St. Gallen on 29 January 2024.

By order dated 1 February 2024, the lower court dismissed the appellant’s application for free legal aid and legal representation and declared a motion for interim measures or suspensive effect to be moot. The Federal Supreme Court did not enter into the appeal against this order (Judgment 2C_104/2024 of 12 March 2024).

By judgment dated 19 April 2024, the Administrative Court of the Canton of St. Gallen dismissed the appeal insofar as it was admissible and upheld the lower authority’s decision not to enter into the matter. The appellant filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court on 27 May 2024 and supplemented it on 14 June 2024.

• Cull order: The ANJF of the Canton of St. Gallen, with the approval of the Federal Office for the Environment (FOEN) dated 27 November 2023, ordered the removal of the wolves of the Calfeisental pack by culling. The regulatory measure was enforceable at the latest until 31 January 2024. The order was published in the Official Gazette of the Canton of St. Gallen and included a notice of legal remedies. Any appeals filed within 14 days of publication were excluded from having suspensive effect (Art. 50 ORP/SG).
• Involved authorities: The Department of Economic Affairs of the Canton of St. Gallen and the ANJF of the Canton of St. Gallen (Legal Service) were involved in the proceedings as respondents or lower court.
• Subject of dispute: The appellant challenged the cull order against the Calfeisental pack, asserting that both it and the wolves were entitled to file an appeal. It alleged a violation of federal law (Art. 89 FSCA) and the Aarhus Convention (Art. 9). It also requested free legal aid and legal representation.
• Procedural stages and deadlines:

The appellant claimed to be particularly affected by the Federal Council’s decision not to conduct a consultation procedure on the partial revision of the Hunting Ordinance. However, the consultation on the definitive partial revision of the Hunting Ordinance had since taken place, and the appellant had been able to participate in it (Judgment 2C_273/2024 of 18 June 2025, para. 1.3.3).

On 18 June 2024, the appellant filed an application for free legal aid and supporting documents. By order dated 19 June 2024, its application for restoration of the appeal period was granted (Art. 50 para. 1 FSCA).

• Legal bases in the cantonal proceedings:

The right to appeal in the cantonal proceedings was governed by Art. 45 para. 1 in conjunction with Art. 64 ORP/SG, under which only those who demonstrate a legitimate interest in the amendment or repeal of the order or decision are entitled to file an appeal or complaint. According to Art. 8 para. 1 ORP/SG, the capacity to be a party required the involvement of natural and legal persons as well as associations of persons.

Legal bases in the Federal Supreme Court proceedings:

The appeal in public law matters was governed by Arts. 90 et seq. FSCA. The appellant claimed to be particularly affected by the contested decision (Art. 89 para. 1 lit. b FSCA) and to have a legitimate interest in its repeal or amendment (Art. 89 para. 1 lit. c FSCA).

The appellant challenged the order dated 1 February 2024 concerning the refusal of free legal aid and legal representation, alleging a violation of Art. 29 para. 3 Cst.

Core issue of the proceedings:

The Federal Supreme Court examined whether the appellant and the wolves were entitled to appeal against the cull order concerning the Calfeisental pack. The lower court had denied the appellant’s and the wolves’ right to appeal on the grounds that neither the appellant nor the wolves could demonstrate a legitimate interest in the repeal of the order and that the wolves lacked the capacity to be a party (contested judgment, paras. 3 and 4).

Procedural course and decisions of the lower courts:

The cantonal authority (Department of Economic Affairs of the Canton of St. Gallen) dismissed the appellant’s appeal with a decision dated 23 January 2024. The Administrative Court of the Canton of St. Gallen upheld this decision not to enter into the matter with a judgment dated 19 April 2024 and dismissed the appeal…