Austrian Constitutional Court Rules Carinthian Wind Power Referendum Invalid

The Austrian Constitutional Court has determined that the public referendum held in Carinthia regarding the prohibition of wind power installations on the region's mountains and alpine pastures did not comply with legal requirements. The decision centers on the phrasing of the referendum question, which the court found to be leading and not sufficiently neutral.

The referendum, conducted in January 2025, asked residents whether the construction of additional wind turbines on Carinthia's mountains and alpine meadows should be banned under state law to protect the region's natural environment and landscape. A majority of 51.55 percent voted in favor of the ban.

After a formal challenge was raised, the court reviewed the content and structure of the referendum question. According to the Constitutional Court, the purpose of a public referendum is to obtain a clear and unbiased expression of voters' will concerning a specific issue. The court emphasized that questions posed in such referendums must be brief, factual, unambiguous, and free from any suggestive or value-laden language that could influence responses.

In its findings, the court noted that highlighting the protection of Carinthia's nature and landscape as the sole rationale for the ban could sway voters toward a specific answer. The court acknowledged that restricting wind power facilities might indeed serve environmental and landscape interests, but also pointed out that such a prohibition could affect other significant objectives, such as independent or regional energy provision, potentially even running counter to them. By emphasizing only the environmental protection aspect, the question failed to neutrally present the broader implications of the decision and did not allow voters to weigh all relevant interests equally.

The Constitutional Court concluded that any referendum question must avoid framing that might guide voters toward a predetermined outcome. In this case, the focus on environmental protection in the question's wording was found to have unduly influenced the result, making the referendum invalid under Austrian law.

This ruling sets a precedent for future referendums in Austria, reinforcing the importance of neutrality and objectivity in public consultation processes. It underscores that legal standards require referendum questions to be phrased without bias, ensuring that outcomes genuinely reflect the diverse perspectives and interests of the electorate. The decision also highlights the ongoing tension between environmental conservation and the expansion of renewable energy infrastructure, a subject of considerable debate at both regional and national levels.

Moving forward, Carinthian authorities will need to reconsider how they approach public participation in decisions relating to renewable energy projects. The court's judgment suggests that any future referendums or consultations must allow for balanced consideration of all relevant factors, including environmental concerns, energy needs, and regional development priorities. The outcome is expected to influence similar processes across Austria and may prompt legislative reviews to clarify standards for formulating referendum questions.