In the dispute about the blackened passages in the file for the interrogation of ex-ÖBAG boss Thomas Schmid, it is now up to the Constitutional Court (VfGH). However, this is causing a stir in the judiciary, because the Supreme Court wants to gain insight into the passages that were not visible until now. Meanwhile, another question in the case has been clarified, namely whether Kurz’s attorney Werner Suppan, deputy member of the Constitutional Court, is eligible for the consultation.
In order not to jeopardize the ongoing investigations in the corruption procedure, the Public Prosecution Service (WKStA) has blacked out more than seven pages of Thomas Schmid’s statements – only black bars are visible in the file.
The Public Prosecutor’s Office also took great care to ensure that the related content of this part of the investigations was not discussed in the ÖVP Commission of Inquiry, but the ÖVP did not want to comply with such a requirement.
Justice in an uproar
Although Schmid ultimately refused to make a statement despite his presence in the committee, Justice Minister Alma Zadic (Greens) urged the VfGH in advance to better protect the investigations of the WKStA. This should make it clear in which fields questions to Schmid should or should not be possible.
However, in order to be able to decide, the Supreme Court also wants to know what the closing law is about, reported the Ö1 “Morgenjournal” on Friday. “As this sealing material goes to a larger group of people, it becomes increasingly difficult to control what happens to this material,” criminal law expert Alois Birklbauer expressed his concerns to Ö1.
Short lawyer without access to files
In general, the Constitutional Court does not need insight to make a decision, but it cannot be ruled out that the court will request the relevant information “before it makes its decision,” confirms constitutional expert Bernd-Christian Funk.
However, one thing is certain in the debate: the lawyer of ex-chancellor Sebastian Kurz (and other ÖVP politicians), Werner Suppan, should not be allowed access to the files. Although Suppan is an alternate member of the Constitutional Court, he has already declared himself biased, as the Supreme Court announced on Wednesday: “It is therefore impossible for RA Mag. Suppan to be convened for consultation on such applications.”
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.
