155.21 VRPGLPJALGA

CH-BE

Art. 9 Law on Administrative Procedure (VRPG)

Fundamentals - Authorities - Recusal and Disqualification

Open official source Full Act (140 Articles) Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Art. 9 Law on Administrative Procedure (VRPG)

1. A person who has to make or prepare a decision or serve as a member of an authority shall recuse themselves if they

a. have a personal interest in the matter;

b. have participated in a preliminary decision;

c. are related to a party either directly or collaterally up to the third degree, by marriage, adoption, registered partnership, or actual cohabitation, with the dissolution of the marriage or registered partnership not nullifying the reason for recusal;

d. lose a statutory requirement for the office;

e. represent a party or have acted for a party in the same matter;

f. could be biased in the matter for other reasons.

2. Decisions on motions for disqualification and contested recusals are made by the competent appellate authority in the matter or, if members of a collegial authority recuse themselves, by the authority excluding the affected members. If it involves an employee of an administrative or administrative justice authority, the supervisory body decides. If it involves the governor, the Department of the Interior and Justice decides in any case.

3. Special provisions on the organization of the government council apply; the provisions on incompatibilities and recusal according to the municipal law are also reserved.

4. The Supreme Court decides on the disqualification of the administrative court in the majority or entirety of its members. In the event that so many members of the administrative court are recused that the adjudicating authority can no longer be properly constituted, an extraordinary court of five members elected by the Grand Council, who must meet the eligibility requirements, decides.

5. Decisions on disqualification or recusal can be made without hearing the opposing party. Otherwise, the regulations of the Swiss Civil Procedure Code of December 19, 2008 (Civil Procedure Code, CPC) apply mutatis mutandis to the application and the consequences of violating the recusal provisions.

← Art. 8 Law on Administrative Justice (LAJ) **1. Fundamentals - Scope** Art. 10 Law on Administrative Procedure (VRPG) →

Court Decisions Applying This Provision (93)

100 2013 209 · be (Art. 9 Abs. 1 Bst. f VRPG)

Claimant v. Hospital Foundation Employees (Recusal from Liability Procedure)

Cited as the legal basis for declaring the refusal request founded (i.e., that the officials must recuse themselves).

100 2025 244 · be (Art. 9 Abs. 1 Bst. f VRPG)

Motion to Disqualify Judge Based on Prior Related Ruling Denied

The application to recuse the judge was rejected because no bias under this provision was established.

100 2025 244 · be (Art. 9 Abs. 5 VRPG)

Motion to Disqualify Judge Based on Prior Related Ruling Denied

The court dispensed with a written exchange of submissions based on this procedural rule.

200 2025 428 · be (Art. 9 Abs. 1 lit. f VRPG)

Recusal of Social Insurance Judge Denied Due to Procedural Rulings and Warning of Negative Judgment

Used to dismiss the application for recusal because no objective appearance of bias was established.

100 2025 81 · be (Art. 9 Abs. 1 Bst. f VRPG)

Municipality Appeal Regarding Official Disqualification for Building Permit Suggestion

This provision on the general clause for bias was the substantive ground used to reject the appeal, as no specific reasons for bias were found.

100 2025 81 · be (Art. 9 Abs. 1 VRPG)

Municipality Appeal Regarding Official Disqualification for Building Permit Suggestion

Cited as the primary legal basis governing the refusal of the challenge for bias (Ausstandsgrund).

200 2024 756 · be (Art. 9 VRPG)

Application to Disqualify Administrative Judge Denied on Grounds of Impartial Procedure

The core of the decision, determining that no grounds for challenge (Ausstandsgründe) under this article were met, leading to the dismissal of the motion.

100 2025 70 · be (Art. 9 Abs. 1 Bst. f VRPG)

Director Recusal Denial in Mobile Facility Appeal

The refusal of the application was based on the finding that no bias existed under this general clause regarding the Director's prior involvement or the criminal complaint.

100 2025 74 · be (Art. 9 Abs. 1 Bst. a-f VRPG)

Appeal Incompetence Following Dismissal of Recusal Request in 5G Facility Dispute

This article on grounds for disqualification was used to evaluate the applicant's request for the Director's recusal, which was ultimately denied in Order 1.

100 2024 2 · be (Art. 9 Abs. 1 Bst. f VRPG)

Municipal Council Excluded for Conflict of Interest in 5G Retrofit Permit Appeal

Cited in reasoning to discuss the scope of abstention grounds, although the actual ruling relied on Art. 47 GG.

100 2024 2 · be (Art. 9 Abs. 1 VRPG)

Municipal Council Excluded for Conflict of Interest in 5G Retrofit Permit Appeal

Cited in reasoning to state that abstention grounds can only be raised against persons who make or prepare a decision.

100 2024 2 · be (Art. 9 Abs. 1 i.V.m. Art. 32 VRPG)

Municipal Council Excluded for Conflict of Interest in 5G Retrofit Permit Appeal

Cited in reasoning to confirm compliance with formal requirements for the appeal.

100 2024 2 · be (Art. 9 Abs. 3 Satz 2 VRPG)

Municipal Council Excluded for Conflict of Interest in 5G Retrofit Permit Appeal

Cited in reasoning to explain that Art. 47 GG applies regarding abstention grounds in municipal administrative proceedings.

100 2024 54 · be (Art. 9 Abs. 1 VRPG)

Attorney Disciplinary Sanction: Temporary Practice Ban for Repeated Failure to Meet Deadlines

Cited in the reasoning (concerning the recusal request) which was not explicitly in the dispositive, but the court applied the procedural framework discussed.

100 2024 54 · be (Art. 9 Abs. 2 Satz 1 VRPG)

Attorney Disciplinary Sanction: Temporary Practice Ban for Repeated Failure to Meet Deadlines

Cited in the reasoning (concerning the recusal request) which was not explicitly in the dispositive, but the court applied the procedural framework discussed.