Pilnacek had asserted that the evidence on which the suspension was based, namely the data stored on his mobile phone, had been collected on the basis of unconstitutional provisions, in particular the Code of Criminal Procedure. However, the Constitutional Court has no reservations about these provisions – insofar as they are even to be applied in disciplinary proceedings.
Whether the Federal Administrative Court correctly applied the provisions that apply to a suspension is not a constitutional question, was explained in the VfGH broadcast. Therefore, the complaint was assigned to the Administrative Court. Pilnacek had requested this in the event that his complaint was unsuccessful.
The Constitutional Court also rejected the damage complaint. This was convicted by a criminal court in July 2017 for breach of trust, with the result that the pension granted for the work as mayor was no longer applicable and was re-assessed in accordance with the provisions of the ASVG.
