Herbert Kickl also failed in second instance with his lawsuit against “Falstaff” publisher Wolfgang Rosam because of a secret corona vaccination he had claimed. Last week, the Higher Regional Court, headed by Judge Fritz Iby, upheld the lower court’s ruling, agreeing with Rosam and dismissing Kickl’s lawsuit. The FPÖ boss must reimburse the PR consultant and legal costs of 2354 euros.
About the background: It was the middle of Covid, two weeks before the state elections in Upper Austria and there was a heated discussion about vaccination. Particularly based on the FPÖ and Herbert Kickl, the most proven opponent of vaccination in Austrian domestic politics. Then the rumor surfaced that Kickl himself had secretly been vaccinated.
Political TV program as a trigger
PR expert and “Falstaff” editor Wolfgang Rosam quoted this rumor on a political TV show. “There are some very bad tongues out there, I have to be careful what I say now. I’m not saying that’s the case, but I heard he was already vaccinated,” Rosam said at the time.
Kickl’s appeal was rejected
That was too much for the FPÖ boss. He responded with a publicly presented negative antibody test – and sued Rosam in the fall of 2021 for defamatory and credit-damaging statements. The otherwise not very prudish FPÖ frontman lost in July 2022 in the first instance before the Vienna commercial court. The judge stated to Rosam that it was permissible to quote a real rumor in a political-journalistic analysis. Kickl would not accept that and appealed to the next instance, the Vienna Higher Regional Court – and now failed again.
“Given the great public interest in politicians’ position on the subject of ‘COVID vaccination’ at the time, there was a legitimate interest in the statement charged,” the March 28 decision said. Moreover, Rosam did not start the rumor herself and has distanced herself from it.
Rosam relieved: ‘It was about press freedom in our country’
Rosam was relieved on Monday: “It was about much more than a nagging complaint from an otherwise not prudish politician, who is himself a state champion of distribution! It was simply about the freedom of the media in our country. Namely: Is a journalistic analysis allowed, for example, to a rumor that actually exists – in this case about a top politician in a hugely controversial and public (vaccination) debate – or are such statements against politicians taboo?”
And the PR consultant added: “Had the court upheld Kickl’s lawsuit, any journalistic political analysis would have quickly become feasible, resulting in a massive restriction on media freedom and freedom of expression.”
Source: Krone
I am Ida Scott, a journalist and content author with a passion for uncovering the truth. I have been writing professionally for Today Times Live since 2020 and specialize in political news. My career began when I was just 17; I had already developed a knack for research and an eye for detail which made me stand out from my peers.
