On the ÖVP's U-committee

Files demanded: SPÖ and FPÖ turn a blind eye to the Constitutional Court

Die Entscheidung des Verfassungsgerichtshofs (VfGH) wird mit Spannung erwartet.

(Bild: Tomschi Peter)

The SPÖ and the FPÖ wanted files from the Ministry of Justice for the ÖVP-initiated sub-committee on the "red-blue abuse of power", but were rebuffed by the Constitutional Court (VfGH). The Supreme Court rejected the application because it was not sufficiently substantiated. Whether the U-Committee is constitutional at all was not examined.

The files that members of parliament from the SPÖ and FPÖ wanted to have delivered were prosecution documents relating to former investigations into the (VP-affiliated) agency Mediaselect. However, they failed with their request due to the coalition majority. The ÖVP and Greens had justified their refusal by stating that the SPÖ and FPÖ had not clearly explained how the requested files could serve to clarify the subject of the investigation.

Constitutional Court rules in favor of government parties
Red and Blue MPs considered the refusal to be unlawful and therefore took the matter to the Constitutional Court. On Friday, however, the Constitutional Court came to the conclusion that the government parties' reasoning could not be contested, as stated in a press release. After all, the SPÖ and FPÖ had not explained in detail to what extent these files relate to actions covered by the investigation period (11 January 2007 to 7 January 2020).

The Supreme Court did not examine whether the subject matter of the investigation itself complies with the constitution.

(Bild: Tomschi Peter)

According to the SPÖ and FPÖ, the entire subject matter of this committee's investigation contradicts constitutional requirements. The Constitutional Court was "not authorized" to examine whether this was the case in this case, which involved a supplementary request for evidence.

Further file deliveries pending
The Supreme Court's decision could have an impact on another request, this time from the People's Party. This party wants files in connection with an old corruption affair involving the Carinthian Freedom Party, but is being put off by the justice department. The same applies to requests from the NEOS regarding the Viennese FPÖ's "expenses affair". In its negative response, the Ministry of Justice referred several times to ongoing investigations by the Constitutional Court.

In a press release, ÖVP parliamentary group leader Hanger expressed his delight at the Constitutional Court's decision, as "red-blue attempts to turn this investigation around" had failed. Meri Disoski, parliamentary group leader of the Greens, saw the rejection by the ÖVP and Greens confirmed. They are on the side of clarification, "regardless of which party sets up a committee of inquiry", she said.

"Unfortunately still no clarity"
"Unfortunately, today's decision by the Constitutional Court still does not clarify whether the committee of inquiry set up by the ÖVP is constitutional at all," criticized SPÖ parliamentary group leader Eva-Maria Holzleitner. This fundamental question would thus be shifted to the responsibility of the ministries, as they would now have to decide for themselves whether to provide files to a potentially unconstitutional committee of inquiry.

FPÖ parliamentary group leader Christian Hafenecker also reacted angrily, accusing the Supreme Court of being "not in a position" to decide on the constitutionality of committees of inquiry.

There wasn't much brainpower involved.

NEOS-Abgeordneter Yannick Shetty über das Verlangen der ÖVP auf Einsetzung des U-Ausschusses

Bild: krone.tv

NEOS parliamentary group leader Yannick Shetty saw the committee of inquiry set up by the ÖVP as "legally on very shaky ground" - without yet knowing the Constitutional Court's decision in detail. If you look at the various errors in the request, you realize that "there wasn't much brainpower involved", he said at a press conference. In the COFAG committee of inquiry, which begins next week, he wants to focus first on the financial administration's dealings with investor René Benko. There are "hair-raising" reports on this from the Innsbruck tax office. Shetty did not want to go into details yet.