Sebastian Kurz
A guilty verdict with many consequences …
The trial against Kurz creates a number of dynamics - an overview.
It is a verdict that the whole country is discussing. Rarely has an ex-chancellor been convicted (not legally binding). Rarely has there been an eight-month conditional sentence for making false statements to the U Committee. Kurz and his former head of cabinet Bernhard Bonelli were acquitted of two of the three charges, while the third point was Kurz's undoing - namely the appointment of the supervisory board members of the state holding company ÖBAG. Both had played down Kurz's role in the appointment of the supervisory board members. The former chancellor always emphasized - also in the committee - that he had been informed but not involved. Judge Michael Radasztics saw things differently.
The consequences are now manifold. The guilty verdict has repercussions for the ÖVP, but Thomas Schmid is also a beneficiary. Here is an overview of the dynamics that are now emerging.
Comeback passé
The Kurz sympathizers within the ÖVP are now off the air. His much-publicized comeback is a thing of the past, and Chancellor Karl Nehammer is confined to concrete for the time being. Nevertheless, the initial verdict is a further setback for the ÖVP in terms of image.
During the election campaign, Nehammer will always be confronted with Kurz's guilty verdict.
Thomas Schmid seems to be on the home stretch - the former confidant of Kurz is aiming for crown witness status. The guilty verdict and, above all, the fact that Radasztics considered Schmid's testimony to be credible help the WKStA to grant Schmid leniency. The Kurz defense invested a lot of energy in undermining Schmid's credibility - but failed. The Russian witnesses did not fully confirm their affidavits in court.
The WKStA's record to date has been mediocre. Many prominent trials, such as the one against Heinz-Christian Strache, ended in acquittal. The guilty verdict in the Kurz trial gives the WKStA a boost.
U-Committee is strengthened
The parliamentary investigation in the U-Committee is strengthened by the ruling. This is because the judge made it clear that false testimony is not a trivial offense. However, one thing is also certain: in future, interrogators will weigh up every word even more carefully. Questioning will become even more laborious.
Kommentare
Da dieser Artikel älter als 18 Monate ist, ist zum jetzigen Zeitpunkt kein Kommentieren mehr möglich.
Wir laden Sie ein, bei einer aktuelleren themenrelevanten Story mitzudiskutieren: Themenübersicht.
Bei Fragen können Sie sich gern an das Community-Team per Mail an forum@krone.at wenden.