The Mouvement Ecologique’s critical view of the Hesperingen bypass

In 2022, the so-called environmental impact assessment for the Hesperingen bypass was presented. At that time, anyone with an interest was able to put forward their suggestions and objections, including Mouvement Ecologique.

At the time – following a site visit – Mouvement Ecologique had raised concerns regarding transport policy, highlighted the massive destruction of habitats and species (some of which are protected), and addressed many other issues. Numerous questions were raised in the process. As is so often the case with the state, Mouvement Ecologique received no response.

Following press reports that the draft legislation for the construction of this bypass had been approved by the Government Council (at a cost of 399 million), the Mouvement Ecologique has now written to the Minister for Transport and Public Works, Yuriko Backes, via its lawyer. The letter states that the Mouvement Ecologique maintains its concerns and expects the Ministry to address the issues and arguments raised. The following is quoted from the letter:

« Dans un souci de transparence et afin de pouvoir apprécier l’effectivité des mesures prévues dans le cadre de la procédure environnementale, ma mandante souhaiterait obtenir des précisions quant aux modalités concrètes de mise en oeuvre de ces mesures, à leur calendrier d’exécution, a leur état d’avancement ainsi qu’aux mécanismes prévus pour assurer leur suivi et leur évaluation.

Ma mandante s’étonne en particulier qu’aucune prise de position détaillée n’ait, a sa connaissance, été communiquée concernant les critiques substantielles formulées dans le cadre de la consultation publique, alors même que celles-ci portent sur des questions fondamentales de conformité au droit de !’Environnement national et européen.

Dans ces circonstances, ma mandante souhaiterait des lors recevoir une réponse aux différents points soulèves dans son courrier du 26 mars 2022, ainsi que toute précision utile quant à la manière dont ces observations ont été prises en considération dans le cadre de la poursuite du projet et de la décision récemment annoncée par le Gouvernement.

Par ailleurs, à la lecture du projet de loi n° 8754 relative à la construction du contournement d’Alzingen, ii apparait qu’il est fait référence à un « rapport provisoire « Contournement d’Alzingen, mesures de compensation et bi/an éco-points, janvier 2026 ». Dans la mesure où ce document semble avoir contribué à l’appréciation des incidences environnementales du projet et des mesures compensatoires envisagées, ma mandante souhaiterait en obtenir communication.

Ma mandante attache une importance particulière à la transparence du processus décisionnel ainsi qu’à la prise en considération effective des observations formulées dans le cadre de la participation du public prévue par les textes applicables et nous sommes convaincus que ce sont des principes qui sont également, et évidemment, partages par votre Ministère. »

English translation by deepl.com

“My client is particularly surprised that, to her knowledge, no detailed response has been provided regarding the substantial criticisms raised during the public consultation, even though these relate to fundamental issues of compliance with national and European environmental law.

In these circumstances, my client would therefore like to receive a response to the various points raised in her letter of 26 March 2022, as well as any useful clarification as to how these observations have been taken into account in the context of the project’s continuation and the decision recently announced by the Government.

Furthermore, on reading draft Bill No. 8754 relating to the construction of the Alzingen bypass, it appears that reference is made to a ‘provisional report: “Alzingen Bypass, Compensatory Measures and Eco-Points”, January 2026’. As this document appears to have contributed to the assessment of the project’s environmental impacts and the proposed compensatory measures, my client would like to receive a copy of it.

My client attaches particular importance to the transparency of the decision-making process and to the effective consideration of the comments made as part of the public consultation provided for in the applicable legislation, and we are convinced that these are principles which are also, and naturally, shared by your Ministry.’

In addition, the letter asks which so-called CEF measures – that is, measures to protect biodiversity which must be successfully implemented prior to the intervention – have already been taken.

You can find the lawyer’s detailed letter HERE and in the downloads.

Translated by deepl.com 

17.06.2026