Meyrin, Carouge, Lancy and the Ville de Genève have filed a recours against Geneva’s new law on swimwear in public pools, turning a local dispute over pool rules into a legal fight. The four communes said on Monday that they want to keep anti-UV clothing allowed in their pools.
The law entered into force at the end of May and requires swimsuits whose maximum length is above the knees and that leave the arms bare. It is now being challenged just as swimmers and pool managers are adjusting to a rule that changes not only what people can wear, but what communal authorities can allow.
What makes the appeal sharper is the reason the communes gave. They said the text is incompatible with the public health objectives local authorities are supposed to promote. Anti-UV clothing, they argued, is a recognized way to prevent the harmful effects of the sun and helps fight skin cancers. They also said the management of communal pools falls within communal responsibilities, which is why they still want that clothing permitted in their facilities.
The law itself has already drawn objections from more than one side. The Conseil d'Etat had previously said it violated individual liberty and communal autonomy, while the communes are now arguing that the same rule runs against health policy and the way pools are run on the ground. That clash matters because the dispute is not over a minor dress code: it is over who decides what is acceptable in public pools, and on what grounds.
The text began as an UDC proposal aimed at penalizing the burkini, then was amended into a broader formula. Even so, the Ville de Vernier filed its own recours with the Chambre constitutionnelle at the beginning of June, calling the law floue et inapplicable and pointing to the absence of a clearly identified public interest and the possible impact on health. The appeal from Meyrin, Carouge, Lancy and the Ville de Genève now widens that challenge.
What comes next is the Chambre constitutionnelle. It will have to decide whether the law survives as written, but no timetable has been set in the material now on the table. For the communes, that means a rule they say they cannot apply cleanly is already in force, and the legal test of whether Geneva can keep it there has only just begun.
