The liberals have recently had several successes in the complaints process. If they are proven right again, the city police would have to take action against the Critical Mass.
Is the Critical Mass just a “spontaneous trip”? The complainants write that this argument does not stand up to closer scrutiny.
The Critical Mass likes to stage itself as a gathering of peacefully pedaling masses. But the pedallers who block the streets of Zurich every last Friday evening of the month also arouse aggression.
An episode captured by the local broadcaster Tele Züri last Friday is indicative of this. A driver of a powerful sports car, surrounded by helmeted cyclists, loses his nerve. He gets out, yells that he has to go to the hospital because his wife is in labour. The answer of a cyclist – one is simply “traffic” – is not able to calm him down. The passenger gets out and pushes a cyclist to the side. When they finally have a free ride, the two roar away.
For the FDP President Përparim Avdili, the scene is significant – for the annoyance that the Critical Mass arouses in other road users, no matter how questionable their reactions to this scene may be. But much more for the fact that the authorities had completely slipped away from the situation. The bike demo is accompanied by so-called dialogue teams from the city police and VBZ. You can also see them in the picture. They remain silent in the face of aggression. You seem helpless.
A supervisory complaint, which Avdili wrote together with his party colleague and former councilor Alexander Brunner, is directed against the general inactivity of the authorities, specifically the Zurich City Council. It is addressed to the governor, who oversees the city council. The FDP wants the city police under Karin Rykart (Greens) to enforce the laws and intervene against the Critical Mass.
Advocates of the Critical Mass take the position that it is part of the traffic. It is neither a demo nor any other occasion, but only spontaneous traffic, and such is not prohibited. In the eyes of the initiators, it is also permitted for several people to ride bikes next to each other – which is necessary in order to block lanes while cycling.
Driving next to each other is strictly forbidden
These arguments are attacked in Avdili and Brunner’s complaint. It is dated November 1st and is available to the NZZ. The claim that no traffic rules were violated is wrong, it says. In principle, cyclists should not ride next to each other. Exceptions are possible, but only if “other traffic is not obstructed”.
According to federal law, everyone should behave in traffic in such a way that “others are not hindered or endangered in the proper use of the road,” the complaint continues. But at the Critical Mass, red lights and priority rules are systematically disregarded. In particular, blocking an intersection for other vehicles is illegal.
The two FDP politicians draw the following conclusion from these rule violations: The Critical Mass does not use the public land as intended. From this, in turn, it follows that an “increased common use” can be assumed. An important finding. Because this legal term describes the situation when a group uses public land excessively.
From a constitutional point of view, this is not illegal per se – otherwise it would be impossible to demonstrate. But organizers can be required to apply for a permit and pay the prescribed fees. The Municipal Code of the City of Zurich also says: “Any use of public land that goes beyond common use requires a permit from the Security Department.”
The complainants write: “By failing to enforce the permit and fee obligation, the city of Zurich violates the law in an obvious way.”
For Brunner and Avdili there is no question that the bike exit is a demonstration, even if this is repeatedly denied. There is certainly an organization behind the event: They are aware of the relevant Telegram channels, and there has already been an exchange between the city and representatives of the Critical Mass. The statement of the event – “We take the space with the bike” – is clearly political.
But even if the occasion is not a demonstration, it is subject to approval because of the increased public use. The City Council has done so in the past.
Tele Züri was the first to report on the FDP complaint. He then received numerous reactions via social media, says Përparim Avdili. Red-green circles represented the complaint as directed against bicycle traffic in favor of car traffic. That’s not true, says Avdili, especially since he himself is a cyclist and public transport user. Public transport is affected far more than car traffic, and remains affected even hours after the critical mass.
20,000 commuters will be disrupted
Avdili and Brunner recently asked the city council how many commuters were affected by the critical mass. Answer: Up to 20,000 on peak days.
In the past, the FDP had several successes with complaints against the city council – against the so-called basic aid (a kind of parallel social aid for the undocumented) or against a copyist of additional costs in connection with the new Triemli bed house.
Should the party succeed again, Avdili expects the police to crack down. He is convinced that this is also possible without a large contingent – by nipping the event in the bud. “If the police communicate clearly and unequivocally that participants will be reported, this has an intimidating effect.” The opposite is the case today. The police even go with you.
Avdili emphasizes that the complaint is directed against the inaction of the city council – and not against cyclists, not even against the bike exit itself. “We have absolutely nothing against a monthly bike happening, but it needs permission and a clear agreement on the route.” As is the case, for example, with the Monday Night Skate for inline skaters. Unfortunately, the city council completely failed to steer the Critical Mass in the right, legal direction in good time.