The motion for it was postponed on Tuesday in the judiciary committee by a government majority. According to parliamentary correspondence, the ÖVP and the Greens consider the definition of evidence to be too vague. NEOS, SPÖ and FPÖ could not understand these concerns.
The imminent resolution of the cell phone deletion ban would be necessary so that evidence cannot be suppressed in the new committee of inquiry into the ÖVP advertisement affair, emphasized justice spokesman Johannes Margreiter. With their application, NEOS want to ensure that the destruction, damage or suppression of evidence in underground committees is just as punishable as it is in legal proceedings.
“Black box under criminal law”
The definition of evidence in the application is so extensive that one would no longer know whether or not relevant evidence would be deleted. Christian Stocker explained why the ÖVP was in favor of the adjournment. Georg Bürstmayr emphasized that the Greens were positive about the matter. But he, too, believes that a more in-depth discussion is necessary because it requires a “definiteness of the object”.
Margreiter considers this argument to be a “sham discussion”. From the point of view of SPÖ justice spokeswoman Selma Yildirim, the intention of the application is very clear and unambiguous. According to Harald Stefan, the FPÖ would also approve the NEOS application.
In the run-up to the new minority U-Committee, there was already excitement about alleged deletion plans in the Chancellery. On Thursday, the SPÖ expressed the fear that the work of the U-Committee should be hindered with a widespread deletion of e-mails. The Chancellery objected (it was just a matter of consolidation) – and the ÖVP and the Greens immediately passed a resolution in the National Council plenum. The Federal Government was thus asked to ensure that the necessary files and data, for example in backup copies, are kept for the exercise of parliamentary control rights, in particular the investigative committee that was last appointed.
