Chancellor refutes criticism – child abuse: ‘Hard punishments are coming’

“If I lock someone up for a long time and don’t offer appropriate therapy options, rehabilitation becomes more difficult,” Beclion underlines her criticism.

“Populism”
Criminal sociologist Reinhard Kreissl, head of the Vienna Center for Social Security, shares the same view. He denies that higher sentences have any preventive effect and describes the government’s approach as “populism”. Kreissl: “There is no correlation between the level of the sentence and the deterrence,” Kreissl makes clear, citing numerous studies. The only deterrent to potential offenders is a high risk of getting caught. It is also important that the punishment follows the crime as soon as possible. Here’s a causal relationship.

“It needs socio-educational offerings”
He receives support from Christoph Koss of the “Neustart” association: “These children and young people act from completely different motives than pedophile sex offenders. Criminal law will not be able to solve this part of the problem.”

It is also important that additional prevention services are expanded, where people who have not yet committed a crime but notice that they are attracted to children can go. “If these people have anonymous and free access to therapy across the board, then children are protected because these people never become perpetrators,” says Koss.

Bernd-Christian Funk believes that you should proceed with a sense of proportion, because there is a risk that accusations without substance will cause damage that cannot be repaired. “On the other hand, it is already clear that all prevention options must be used.”

“Legislative Quick Shot”
WU professor Harald Eberhard is concerned with the balance between the rights of children and those of suspects in private and family life. If the project is carried out, there must be an exception to the professional secrecy. In addition, the obligation to report should already apply to the criminal investigation department if there is a reasonable suspicion. Otherwise official liability claims can lead to lengthy proceedings if appropriate measures are not taken. Legal expert Alois Birklbauer describes many points in the law as “legislative quick fixes”. There are indications that the Penal Code does not yet know.

Chancellor Karl Nehammer, on the other hand, defends the government’s package of measures to protect children and young people. “I reject the idea that punishments are only seen as having a preventive effect,” refuted the chancellor’s criticism that child abusers were not deterred from higher sentences.

“I am convinced that with this package we have decided on important measures in the field of victim protection and prevention. But above all, that we are taking a big step towards fair punishment,” Nehammer sums up. With regard to the accusation that higher sentences being “simple and cheap” and “populist”, the chancellor says punishments are not just prevention, but “sanctions for the crime so that the victims can get justice.” Punishment is ultimately how our society says what it will and will not tolerate.”

“This Fate Is Real”
Arguing that the possible sentence of up to ten years in paragraph 207a of the Penal Code (depiction of child abuse) is too high because it is the same as for assault and rape, Nehammer says: “It’s about production and distribution. It’s about so not just for possession. The attack is real. This fate is real.” Further comments would also very well be examined in the legislative process.

“No one can understand that until now one has been punished less for depicting child abuse than for aggravated theft,” continued Nehammer. With regard to the Teichtmeister case, the chancellor underlined the future reporting obligation: “If children are involved, the employer must be informed. In the Teichtmeister case, the worst mistakes were made that no one can understand.”