With his many layoffs, ex-ÖBAG boss Thomas Schmid caused a huge stir in ÖVP’s investigative committee. He always referred to the ongoing investigations of the prosecutor’s office. However, Parliament sees no reason for refusal. It’s a new legal area.
When Thomas Schmid was interrogated, a rhythm of refusal and reprisal quickly calmed down. “Either you testify or you renounce. There is no middle ground,” explains lawyer Roland Kier.
Schmid and his attorney base the right to refuse to testify on a recent decision by the Federal Administrative Court. Kier interprets it to mean that Schmid has the right as an information provider to refuse to answer the questions, even if he has already confessed.
Confession creates new situation
Parliament has a different legal opinion on the issue of refusal to testify. It is based on questioning in criminal proceedings. Defendants have the right to refuse to testify. But there is one exception: anyone who has made a confession must testify about the causes to which the confession relates. For Schmid, who has already confessed, this means that he should have answered all the questions in the committee that he had already confessed to the prosecutor.
The judge will have to decide who is right.
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.
