She cannot explain why she was suddenly no longer on the review committee. In the afternoon it was again the turn of the former Secretary General in the Ministry of Finance, Thomas Schmid. The key witness had been answering questions all afternoon on Monday and had incriminated Wöginger with his statement.
Wöginger and his two co-defendants are accused of having given an ÖVP mayor a board position in the Braunau tax office. Schmid’s questioning on Tuesday did not provide any significant new information. Wöginger’s lawyer Michael Rohregger spent hours trying to work out that Schmid would reconstruct a lot of things and not remember them, including numerous exchanges with the judge and the senior public prosecutor.
The witness was a member of the Freistadt assessment commission
Table of Contents
The first witness on Tuesday was a retired tax officer. Ms. G. was a member of many assessment committees, but not the one for the Braunau tax office. But she did sit in the one that was about the board of the Freistadt tax office – the ÖVP mayor and later first place in the Braunau hearing had also applied here, but was not accepted.
At the time, the witness rated the local politician significantly worse than the other commission members who were close to the ÖVP. They based their more positive assessment on his leadership experience as mayor. But she couldn’t understand this argument: “From my point of view, it’s a completely different activity.” The others ultimately reduced their points and adjusted them somewhat to their opinions.
“I was on duty on the day of the meeting”
The witness said she could not explain why she was suddenly no longer represented on the board appointments committee in Braunau a short time later. “I was surprised because it was common practice” that she was appointed there in her role. She had been on vacation for two or three weeks before that. But that wouldn’t have been an obstacle. “I was on duty the day of the meeting. It just took place a few doors down.” The ÖVP mayor emerged as the best.
“The party is behind me”
The local politician is said to have asked Wöginger in advance for help with his application. The local boss, who has not been accused himself, admits this and spoke in court of a mistake. Wöginger only claims to have forwarded the “citizens’ concern” to Schmid for review, but has had no influence. Schmid, on the other hand, spoke of a party political wish that he had to fulfill. He described how he turned to the second defendant, a member of the hearing commission, and asked him to “take care of it.” He confirmed the intervention, but did not claim to have acted accordingly.
The then chairman of the hearing commission is also charged. He is said to have preferred the mayor from his own party ties. The sentence “The party is behind me” has been recorded several times. Witness G. confirmed that she noticed this in an official context on Tuesday in response to a question from the judge. “The sentence has been used several times over the years,” namely “to support the argument when there were no other arguments.” This also affected personnel issues, but to her knowledge it did not come up in hearings.
The trial will continue on March 17th with further witness interviews. A verdict is scheduled for April 21.
