In Gramasteten, a VP politician prevented the broadcast of the local parliament session. The aim is only to cause a scandal, his lawyer said in a letter.
The city council meetings are public, but almost completely closed to the public. Except for a few particularly sensitive agenda items, the stands are empty. And that seems to sit well with many (ruling) parties. They would probably prefer to make private decisions. At least that is the impression given by the debates about the introduction of live broadcasts of the meetings.
Greens threatened to sue
In Gramastetten, an ÖVP mandatary even threatened the Greens with a lawsuit if they streamed the meeting on the internet. His lawyer cited several grounds for a ban. One of them: The broadcast is only meant to scandal and show people.
“I have no influence on what individual mandate holders do. The fact is that there is information from the state that meetings should not be streamed on YouTube, but only on the home page of the community. And I’ll stick to that,” said black mayor Andreas Fazeni. When the first “legally watertight” livestream will be available, he cannot say, because there are more important things.
First application already in March
The Greens are angry. You submitted the first video transmission application in March, but initially failed due to skepticism from your competitors. As the country sent positive signals, the costs and now the threat of lawsuits emerged as new hurdles.
Source: Krone
I’m an experienced news author and editor based in New York City. I specialize in covering healthcare news stories for Today Times Live, helping to keep readers informed on the latest developments related to the industry. I have a deep understanding of medical topics, including emerging treatments and drugs, the changing laws that regulate healthcare providers, and other matters that affect public health.
