Complaint Against Wöginger Diversion: WKStA Cites General Prevention

The fact that "even in the case of a - as here condensed - suspicion, a conviction ultimately cannot be expected" could not have a "deterrent effect on potential imitators," quoted "Der Standard" from the complaint.

This is particularly true because in many other cases such patronage cannot be proven at all. Public appointments "based on political affiliation instead of individual qualification" represent "a societal and ultimately also democratic-political problem that has existed for many years and decades," according to the Economic and Corruption Prosecutor's Office (WKStA).

In addition, Wöginger "repeatedly and insistently over a longer period" demanded the appointment of the ÖVP mayor. The chats with Schmid would show "that favors are regularly granted in the (...) expectation of a future return favor" - true to the motto: "One hand washes the other." In all defendants, "serious guilt is assumed." The WKStA also points out that a diversion in the case of abuse of office is only possible if, according to the law, "no or only a minor or otherwise insignificant harm to rights has been caused." From the perspective of the prosecution, however, the damage was anything but "insignificant."

WKStA initially agreed to diversion

The WKStA initially agreed to a diversion in the abuse of office case, although it saw an "absolute borderline case." However, the Vienna Public Prosecutor's Office (OStA) issued the directive to file a complaint. The conditions for terminating the criminal proceedings through a diversion would not be met. General preventive aspects would also argue against it, as the OStA had already justified. Now the Higher Regional Court of Linz is in charge. If the complaint is upheld, the proceedings would have to be conducted at the Regional Court of Linz.

(APA/Red)

This article has been automatically translated, read the original article here.